From jel-skills
Polishes JEL survey prose to match the authoritative, accessible, long-form voice expected by the Journal of Economic Literature. Use after the framework is settled.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/jel-skills:jel-writing-styleThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- The framework and coverage are settled and it is time to make the survey *read* well
A JEL survey is read by non-specialist economists — smart, but not in this subfield. The voice is that of a trusted, fair expert teaching the field to a colleague from another area. Four qualities define it:
A JEL introduction differs from a research-paper intro. The arc:
frame the field (what it studies, why it matters to economists broadly) → why a synthesis is needed now (new evidence / method shift / policy salience) → the organizing question and the spine (the map the reader will be given) → what the survey concludes and the open questions (the payoff, stated up front) → roadmap (brief).
State the bottom line early. A survey that withholds its conclusions to a final section wastes the non-specialist's time and reads as indecisive.
A survey abstract describes what the survey does for the reader, not a single empirical finding: the field, why a synthesis now, the organizing idea, and the headline state-of-knowledge takeaway. Avoid "we estimate / we find a coefficient of…"; that is a primary-paper abstract. (Confirm any length/format limits in the AEA JEL style guide via jel-submission.)
JEL surveys are long, and length is a privilege, not a license. Every section must earn its pages by advancing the argument about the field; coverage for its own sake (the confirmatory tier of jel-comprehensiveness-and-balance) belongs in compact citation clusters, not in paragraph-length summaries. Use subsection summaries and a recurring return to the spine so a reader who puts the survey down can re-enter it without rereading.
【Opening arc】frame → why-now → question+spine → conclusions+open-questions → roadmap? Y/N
【Bottom line early】state of knowledge stated up front? Y/N
【Accessibility】intuition-first; jargon controlled; non-specialist can follow? Y/N
【Signposting】architecture mirrors spine; periodic cues? Y/N
【Synthesis prose】papers in dialogue, not listed? Y/N
【Abstract】survey-style (contribution to reader), not a single estimate? Y/N
【Next step】→ jel-classification-system (assign JEL codes) → jel-submission
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin jel-skillsPolishes JEP article prose to be engaging, clear, and authoritative-but-readable. Revises sentence-level voice, abstracts, and openings—active voice, plain language, minimal notation.
Revises Annual Review of Economics reviews for the ARE voice: authoritative, accessible, signposted, with strong opening and forward-looking close. Polishes prose and structure after framework and evidence are settled.
Routes between specialized JEL survey-writing skills based on the current stage of a review article for the Journal of Economic Literature. Use when unsure which jel-* sub-skill to invoke next.