agentsclimarketplace

Rof writing style

Skill brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/Review-of-Finance-Skills/skills/rof-writing-style

Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. | 覆盖主流期刊的 Claude Code/Codex 期刊技能包,从选题、识别策略到表格规范与审稿回复全流程,助你快速发论文。

Install
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill rof-writing-style

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

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Use when revising a Review of Finance manuscript for a 150-word abstract, double-blind wording, Chicago-style references, first-order finance framing, two-round review discipline, and 60-page total manuscript constraint.

SKILL.md

4.5 KB, 956 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Review of Finance Writing Style

Use this after the core result is stable. RoF is read across all of finance — empirical and theoretical — and held to top-three-finance-journal standards, so the prose must make a first-order contribution legible to a general finance reader fast, not read as a narrow field-journal appendix. Polish only once identification/results (empirical) or assumptions/results (theory) are settled.

When to trigger

  • The prose buries the contribution; a reader cannot find it quickly.
  • The abstract exceeds 150 words or never states the finding.
  • The introduction wanders before reaching the question and the result.

Revision rules

  • Keep the abstract within the 150-word limit and make the finance contribution explicit: open with the question and approach, then state the result (a number for empirical work, the proposition for theory), and close with the economic implication. Count the words.
  • Follow the RoF intro arc: question, why it is open or hard, setting/approach, headline result early, mechanism and interpretation, contribution against the top-three frontier, brief roadmap.
  • Preserve double-blind anonymity: no author-identifying references, acknowledgements, grants, repositories, or self-revealing wording (and scrub PDF metadata).
  • Use Chicago citation and reference style, consistently.
  • Explain why the result meets top-three-finance standards before drilling into mechanics; lead the intro with the finance question, not the estimator.
  • Quantify rather than using vague intensifiers; define notation once.
  • Keep the full manuscript within the 60-page total cap, including appendices, bibliography, figures, and tables — economical prose is part of fitting the cap.

Abstract rebuild — worked example

Illustrative; the rebuilt version is 55 words, well under the 150-word ceiling:

Before: "This paper investigates the relationship between climate risk and
bank lending using a large sample of European banks and several econometric
techniques. Results show significant effects."

After:  "How does flood-risk exposure reprice bank credit? Matching 1.2
million loans to address-level hazard maps across six EU countries, we show
lenders charge 14 bp more per one-s.d. risk increase - but only after the
2021 floods, implying salience rather than information moves climate
pricing."

The rebuilt abstract states question, data, number, condition, and economic message — the skeleton a full 150-word RoF abstract scales up from.

Five edit passes for the general-finance reader

  • Pass 1 — claims: every paragraph's first sentence carries a finding or an argumentative step; delete throat-clearing about importance.
  • Pass 2 — numbers: replace "substantial", "strong", and "robust" with the bp, percent, or euro figure; at least one magnitude per headline claim.
  • Pass 3 — jargon: subfield terms (SFDR Article 9, LTRO, UCITS) get a one-clause gloss at first use, because the RoF reader spans asset pricing to household finance.
  • Pass 4 — anonymity sweep: search for author surnames, "our earlier paper", grant numbers, and repository URLs; scrub metadata after the final compile, not before.
  • Pass 5 — cap: each page of prose trimmed is a page of identification evidence the 60-page ceiling lets you keep.

Prose objections from RoF reports and the fix

  • "The introduction oversells" → cut adjectives, keep figures; let the event-study plot carry the conviction the adjectives were faking.
  • "I could not locate the contribution until page 7" → move the headline number into the first two pages, per the intro arc above.
  • "Well written but reads like a field-journal piece" → re-anchor the opening paragraph in the general finance question rather than the institutional detail; the institution is the laboratory, not the point.

Anti-patterns

  • An abstract over 150 words, or one that states the topic but not the finding.
  • Leading the intro with method instead of the finance question.
  • Inconsistent or non-Chicago citations.

Output format

[Style diagnosis] clear / too narrow / too long / anonymity risk
[Abstract fix] <150-word target>
[Finance framing] <first-order contribution sentence>
[Page compression] <what to cut or move>
[Anonymity edits] <specific fixes>

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.