Individual skill
ecopol-robustness
Use when an Economic Policy (EP) manuscript's results may be specification-, sample-, or inference-fragile, especially ahead of the two-discussant panel. Organizes robustness by the threat a discussant will raise; it does not invent evidence or citations.
Economic-Policy-Skills/skills/ecopol-robustness/SKILL.md
Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 9, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 1,411
- Repository last updated
- Sep 27, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- academic-writing Repository topic
- agent-skills Repository topic
- journal Repository topic
- academic-research Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- anthropic Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- claude Repository topic
- claude-code Repository topic
- economics Repository topic
- security Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 5,811 bytes
Read excerpt
# Robustness Strategy (ecopol-robustness)
## When to trigger
- The headline policy magnitude moves under plausible alternative specifications
- A discussant could attribute the result to one sample, period, or country
- Inference rests on few clusters / few treated units (common in policy evaluations)
- The result is statistically significant but the **magnitude** — the part a policymaker uses — is imprecise
- You are pre-empting the academic discussant's "have you tried…" before the conference
## Robustness is discussant-proofing, not a checklist dump
At EP, robustness has a specific purpose: the paper will be debated live by **two invited discussants** who act as the referees, and the academic one will arrive with a list of fragility tests. So organize robustness **by the threat each test neutralizes**, not as a mechanical appendix of "alternative specifications." A reader (and the policy discussant) should see, for each test, *which way of being wrong it rules out*. Because EP papers carry a recommendation, the central object to defend is the **magnitude and its confidence interval**, not just the sign.
