Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/aejmic-literature-positioning
Use when the contribution of an American Economic Journal: Microeconomics (AEJ: Micro) manuscript is fuzzy or oversold relative to the closest existing results. Stakes the theorem-relative delta against the nearest theory; it does not build the model (see aejmic-theory-model) or frame the prose (see aejmic-writing-style).
Passed 19 of 21 test cases with the skill, and 4 of 21 without it.
and 26 more in the full report
18 fixed2 passed either way0 still failing2 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 17 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I'm revising the literature review for an information economics paper on partial commitment and need to frame my paper's contribution rigorously. Please evaluate my positioning and format the output with the following sections: the exact nearest paper with its key result, the classification of our incremental advance, what our result explicitly leaves unimproved, a concise neighborhood map of core papers with one clause each, a check on whether the frame targets economic theory over empirical work, and the immediate follow-up action.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Response includes the bracketed header 【Closest result】. | Missed | Passed |
| Response classifies the advance under 【Our delta】 using a valid taxonomy category. | Missed | Passed |
| Response includes the bracketed header 【Frontier check】. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
For a theory-first journal, positioning is theorem-relative: identify the closest existing result and state precisely the delta — what your model relaxes, generalizes, characterizes, or overturns. Vague "we contribute to the literature on X" framing is the most common avoidable weakness. AEJ: Micro referees are subject-matter experts; they know the nearest theorem and will measure your delta against it.
Position against the theory frontier (mechanism design, IO theory, information economics, decision theory…), not against empirical applied-micro papers — that signals an AEJ: Applied framing. If your result has an empirical or experimental companion literature, cite it as motivation, not as the bar your contribution clears.
| Delta type | What it looks like | What the reader must see |
|---|---|---|
| Weaker assumption | Same conclusion, fewer/looser hypotheses | The dropped assumption named; that the old proof breaks without your argument |
| New environment | Old mechanism, richer setting (search, networks, dynamics) | What the new setting adds that the old result could not capture |
| Full characterization | Prior work had a special case or sufficiency only | Both directions; the boundary of the characterization |
| Impossibility / no-go | Prior work conjectured or assumed possibility | The exact obstruction and which primitive causes it |
| New mechanism | Same phenomenon, different economic force | Why the new force is the right explanation |
State which row you are in in the contribution paragraph — a referee who cannot classify your delta will undervalue it.
If a close result appeared independently and around the same time, acknowledge it explicitly and state the relationship (different method, complementary result, prior circulation date). Silence here reads as either ignorance or concealment to an expert referee.
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.