Review r

Skill brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills/skills/41-sticerd-eee-sewage-econometrics-check/skills/review-r

🔬 A curated collection of 23,000+ agent skills for empirical research across 8 social science disciplines. | 精选 23,000+ AI Agent 技能库，覆盖8大社会科学学科的实证研究。CoPaper.AI 20分钟完成一篇可复现的规范实证论文，并支持用户上传 Skills。-- Maintained by CoPaper.AI from Stanford REAP.

Install

npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill review-r

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

R code review for the sewage project. Checks script structure, reproducibility, function design, figure quality, and professional polish against project conventions (here::here, arrow/parquet, fixest, modelsummary, native pipe). This skill should be used when asked to "review the code", "check my script", or "code review".

SKILL.md

5.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Review R Code

Run a code quality review on R scripts in the sewage project. Produces a report — does NOT edit source files.

Input: $ARGUMENTS — a .R filename, directory path, or all.

Project-Specific Conventions

Script Structure

Pipeline scripts (layers 01-06):

Header block (########) → roxygen description → initialise_environment() → setup_logging() → CONFIG list → functions → main() → conditional execution (sys.nframe() == 0)

Analysis scripts (09_analysis):

Numbered sections with # === separators, inline package loading, direct execution (no main() wrapper)

Required Conventions

Paths: here::here() — never relative paths or setwd()
Data formats: arrow (parquet) for intermediate/final; DuckDB for large joins
Pipe: Native R pipe |> (not %>%)
Naming: snake_case for functions/variables, UPPER_SNAKE_CASE for constants
Econometrics: fixest::feols() for regressions
Tables: modelsummary → LaTeX with tabularray format
SE: vcov = "hetero" for heteroskedasticity-robust
Factors: forcats::as_factor() / forcats::fct_drop()

Key Files

Scripts: scripts/R/01_data_ingestion/ through scripts/R/09_analysis/
Utilities: scripts/R/utils/
Output: output/{figures,tables,html_plots,regs,log}/

Workflow

Step 1: Identify Scripts

If $ARGUMENTS is a specific .R file: review that file
If $ARGUMENTS is a directory: review all .R files in that directory
If $ARGUMENTS is all: review all scripts in scripts/R/
If no argument: ask which scripts to review

Step 2: Review Each Script (9 Categories)

Category 1: Script Structure

Pipeline scripts: header block, roxygen, initialise_environment(), CONFIG list, main(), conditional execution
Analysis scripts: numbered sections with # === separators
Clear separation of concerns

Category 2: Console Hygiene

No unnecessary print() / cat() pollution
Logging via setup_logging() in pipeline scripts
Clean output — only meaningful messages

Category 3: Reproducibility

set.seed() where randomness is involved
All paths via here::here() — no setwd(), no relative paths, no hardcoded absolute paths
No hardcoded values that should be in CONFIG

Category 4: Function Design

DRY — no duplicated code blocks
Functions at appropriate abstraction level
Shared utilities in scripts/R/utils/ where reuse is needed

Category 5: Figure Quality

Axis labels present and readable
Appropriate dimensions (not too wide/narrow)
Consistent theme across plots
Alpha transparency for overlapping points
Saved to output/figures/ via here::here()

Category 6: Data Persistence

Intermediate results saved as parquet (arrow::write_parquet())
saveRDS() for R-specific objects
No orphaned temporary files

Category 7: Comments

Explain why, not what
Section headers for navigation
No commented-out dead code

Category 8: Error Handling

Graceful failures with informative messages in pipeline scripts
File existence checks before reading
Data validation where appropriate

Category 9: Polish

Consistent style (indentation, spacing)
No dead code or unused imports
Clean namespace — library() calls at top
Native pipe |> (not magrittr %>%)

Step 3: Present Summary

## Code Review: [filename/directory]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Scripts reviewed:** N

### Issues by Severity
| Script | Critical | Major | Minor |
|--------|----------|-------|-------|
| ... | ... | ... | ... |

### Top 3 Critical Issues
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...

### Conventions Compliance
- [ ] here::here() for all paths
- [ ] Native pipe |>
- [ ] arrow/parquet for data
- [ ] fixest for regressions
- [ ] modelsummary for tables

### Score: XX / 100

Save report to output/log/code_review_[target].md.

Step 4: IMPORTANT

Do NOT edit any source files. Only produce reports. Fixes are applied after user review.

Principles

Report only, never edit. The reviewer is a critic, not a creator.
Project conventions matter. Flag deviations from the conventions above, not personal preferences.
Proportional severity. A missing set.seed() is Major. A missing comment is Minor. Using setwd() is Critical.
Language-specific. Check R idioms — vectorised operations over loops, tidyverse patterns, proper use of factors.
Pipeline vs analysis distinction. Different structure expectations for pipeline scripts vs analysis scripts.