Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/cps-workflow
Use when starting or navigating any Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript and you need the right next sub-skill, chosen by lifecycle stage and whether the paper makes a genuinely comparative claim across countries or over time. It dispatches; it does not draft content.
Passed 18 of 24 test cases with the skill, and 6 of 24 without it.
and 14 more in the full report
14 fixed4 passed either way4 still failing2 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 14 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
My statistical models and tables are finalized. Now I want to ensure my prose reads engagingly for a broad comparativist readership across subfields before depositing data. Assess my project stage, comparative fit, routing destination with brief explanation, and the next step after that using the bracketed output format with 【Stage】, 【Comparative?】, 【Route to】, 【Why】, and 【Then】.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Directs the user to `cps-writing-style`. | Missed | Passed |
| Identifies transparency and replication planning as the subsequent step in the pipeline. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
The orchestrator for a Comparative Political Studies submission. Figure out the stage, then send the user to the matching skill. CPS is the discipline's comparative-politics specialist (SAGE, since 1968) — the router's first job is to confirm the paper makes a comparative argument (across countries, subnational units, or over time), not a single-case study with no comparative leverage.
cps-rebuttal)| Situation | CPS fit | Route to |
|---|---|---|
| Cross-national or cross-regional claim | Strong | normal pipeline below |
| Subnational comparison or over-time within one country | Strong (intra-national counts) | normal pipeline |
| Single case used to build/test a portable theory | Conditional — must travel | cps-topic-selection + cps-theory-building |
| Single country, descriptive, no comparative leverage | Weak — likely off-fit | cps-topic-selection (reframe) |
| General US poli-sci or pure IR theory | Off-fit — see sibling guard | reconsider venue |
CPS publishes work on democratization & regimes, institutions, political behavior & participation, ethnic politics & conflict, comparative political economy, and parties & elections — comparative in design or in the portability of the claim.
Idea / comparative fit? → cps-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the field? → cps-literature-positioning
What's the argument? → cps-theory-building
Is the design defensible? → cps-research-design
Are the analyses sound? → cps-data-analysis
Are the exhibits clear? → cps-tables-figures
Does it read for comparativists? → cps-writing-style
Replication & transparency? → cps-transparency-and-data
How will it be judged? → cps-review-process
test cases passed, vs 6 / 24 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.