Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/aejmac-literature-positioning
Use when the contribution of an American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics (AEJ: Macro) manuscript relative to the macro frontier is fuzzy, contested, or undersold. Frames the marginal contribution against quantitative-theory and identified-empirical literatures; it does not fix the identification or the model itself.
Passed 18 of 21 test cases with the skill, and 4 of 21 without it.
and 26 more in the full report
16 fixed3 passed either way2 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 15 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I wrote a macro paper linking monetary policy shocks to consumption inequality using a heterogeneous-agent model matched with local projections. Right now my introduction has a massive citation wall, and I worry reviewers will think my contribution is just incremental. Please restructure my literature positioning into a clear summary that isolates the 2-3 nearest prior studies with distinct wedges, contrasts my work against theoretical and empirical baselines, gives a single core contribution sentence containing a numerical magnitude, outlines my scope limits, and suggests next steps for my draft.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| The response structures output using the tag 【Nearest papers + wedge】. | Missed | Passed |
| The response includes the tag 【Vs. theory frontier】. | Missed | Passed |
| The response includes the tag 【Vs. empirical frontier】. | Missed | Passed |
| The response includes the tag 【Contribution sentence (with quantity)】. | Missed | Passed |
| The response includes the tag 【Scope / what it does NOT claim】. | Missed | Passed |
| The response includes the tag 【Next step】. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
AEJ: Macro is a broad-interest macro journal, so positioning must locate the paper for a general macro reader, not only for the three people working on the exact model or shock series. Two literatures usually bound a macro paper, and you must place the contribution against both:
A hybrid paper (model matched to identified evidence) must say why the combination answers a question neither side resolved alone — this is often the strongest AEJ: Macro contribution.
Do not list 30 citations. Name the 2–3 papers a referee would call "basically the same," and state in one sentence what your paper does that each cannot. The wedge should be a quantity, mechanism, or identification gain, not "a different dataset."
"We show that [mechanism] accounts for [X%] of [aggregate], overturning/refining the prior view that ___." A magnitude makes the contribution legible to a general reader and to the AEA process.
Say what the paper does not establish: the regime, sample, or country where the result holds, and what remains open. Over-claiming is the fastest path to a referee's "the contribution is oversold."
test cases passed, vs 4 / 21 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.