Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →brycewang-stanford/econ-intro-writing
Guide for writing the introduction to an academic economics paper.
Passed 22 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 20 of 22 without it.
2 fixed20 passed either way0 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 2 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
In my literature positioning section near the end of the introduction, I wrote three paragraphs summarizing papers by Smith (2018), Jones (2020), and Lee (2022). How should these value-added paragraphs be structured to align with top economics writing standards?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Recommends structuring value-added paragraphs around the paper's own new contribution first. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
You win or lose your readers with the introduction. Research shows that economics papers with more readable introductions get cited more. The introduction is where you lay out your research question, your empirical strategy, your findings, and why it all matters - succinctly.
This skill is based primarily on David Evans' analysis of introductions in top economics journals (AER, QJE, AEJ: Applied, etc.), supplemented by Keith Head's "Introduction Formula," Claudia Sahm's advice for job market papers, and Marc Bellemare's "Middle Bits Formula."
Papers in top journals largely follow this pattern. There is variation, but the skeleton is remarkably consistent:
A typical introduction in a top journal runs about 10-15 paragraphs. It front-loads the paper's own contribution and pushes detailed literature discussion toward the end.
Open by convincing the reader that the topic matters. The first paragraph should hook the reader with one of the following strategies:
A big development or economic problem, then a specific angle:
A puzzle or tension in existing evidence:
A policy-relevant fact or debate:
test cases passed, vs 20 / 22 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.