From jmcb-skills
Routes manuscript work for JMCB submissions by diagnosing bottlenecks and dispatching to specialized sub-skills for topic selection, identification, robustness, exhibits, or revision.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/jmcb-skills:jmcb-workflowThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
This is the router. It names **which jmcb-* skill to use at the current stage** of a manuscript aimed at the *Journal of Money, Credit and Banking* (JMCB) — the monetary-economics, banking, and macro-finance outlet **owned by the Ohio State University Department of Economics and published by Wiley-Blackwell** (founded 1969). JMCB rewards **policy-relevant** work that bridges theory and evidence...
This is the router. It names which jmcb- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at the Journal of Money, Credit and Banking (JMCB) — the monetary-economics, banking, and macro-finance outlet owned by the Ohio State University Department of Economics and published by Wiley-Blackwell (founded 1969). JMCB rewards policy-relevant work that bridges theory and evidence on monetary transmission, bank balance sheets, credit frictions, and central-bank policy — whether the engine is a monetary/banking model (DSGE, search-and-matching banks) or empirics (SVAR, local projections, high-frequency monetary surprises, micro-banking panels).
Operational tells you are at JMCB and not a sibling: submission runs through Editorial Express (not Wiley's ScholarOne or Editorial Manager); there is a submission fee (US$150 subscriber / US$200 non-subscriber, refunded minus US$50 if desk-rejected; waived for resubmissions — 检索于 2026-06;以官网为准); the journal strongly recommends ≤40 pages including references, tables, and figures but excluding the online appendix; and it carries the historical JMCB Data Archive legacy (the Dewald–Thursby–Anderson 1986 replication study and the 2006 "Got Replicability?" follow-up were both about this journal). Editors as of 2026 include Sanjay Chugh and Pok-sang Lam (OSU), Robert DeYoung (Kansas), and Kenneth D. West (待核实;以官网为准).
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Scope/audience fit uncertain; might be a JME or JBF paper instead | jmcb-topic-selection |
| Contribution vs. the monetary/banking frontier is fuzzy or undersold | jmcb-literature-positioning |
| Macro identification (SVAR/narrative/HF surprises) or micro-banking causal design is shaky | jmcb-identification |
| Bank/central-bank data construction, measurement, or sample is fragile | jmcb-empirical-design |
| Results may be specification-, sample-, or inference-sensitive | jmcb-robustness |
| Exhibits are dense; IRFs/coefficient plots do not answer the question | jmcb-tables-figures |
| Online appendix is too thin, too sprawling, or carries main claims | jmcb-internet-appendix |
| Intro/abstract bury the policy message; prose misses the JMCB voice | jmcb-writing-style |
| Close to submission; need the 40-page + Editorial Express preflight | jmcb-submission |
| Likely objections (and which editor desk) should be anticipated | jmcb-referee-strategy |
| A decision letter or referee report needs a response plan | jmcb-rebuttal |
jmcb-topic-selection — lock the monetary/banking/macro-finance question and policy stakesjmcb-literature-positioning — stake the contribution vs. JME, AEJ:Macro, RED, JBFjmcb-identification — macro identification or micro-banking causal designjmcb-empirical-design — bank/central-bank data, measurement, sample constructionjmcb-robustness — specification, sample, and inference fragilityjmcb-tables-figures — IRFs, coefficient plots, balance-sheet tables that read cleanlyjmcb-internet-appendix — offload supporting material; keep the 40-page core self-containedjmcb-writing-style — make the policy idea land (abstract + intro last)jmcb-submission — Editorial Express preflight, fee, page limit, data exemptionjmcb-referee-strategy — anticipate objections before submittingjmcb-rebuttal — after the R&R
jmcb-writing-styleis a late-stage polish; do not rewrite the intro before identification and the evidence hierarchy settle.jmcb-referee-strategyis most useful before submission (to harden the paper) and again when a report lands.
jmcb-tables-figures polish IRFs while the SVAR identification is still movingJMCB spans four engines, and the binding constraint differs by engine. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.
| Archetype | Likely first bottleneck | Enter at |
|---|---|---|
| Quantitative monetary/banking model (DSGE, banking-friction) | what disciplines the parameters; policy-relevant counterfactual | jmcb-identification → jmcb-empirical-design |
| Macro identification (SVAR / narrative / HF monetary surprises) | shock identification + IRF inference | jmcb-identification |
| Micro-banking causal design (bank/loan-level panel) | clustering, weak-IV, staggered-policy bias | jmcb-identification → jmcb-empirical-design |
| Measurement / policy-evaluation (central-bank, regulation) | data construction + robustness to sample/window | jmcb-empirical-design → jmcb-robustness |
A user says: "My local-projection estimates of how a monetary-policy shock hits small-bank lending look fine, but a referee says the shock is contaminated by the Fed's information effect and the bank panel SEs are understated." Those are two distinct JMCB pushbacks — shock identification (informationally robust high-frequency surprises, à la the information-effect critique) and inference (clustering at the bank and time level). Route to jmcb-identification first to clean the shock, then jmcb-robustness for two-way clustering and a Driscoll–Kraay alternative; only once the lending elasticity is stable (say it settles at −1.8%, illustrative) return to jmcb-tables-figures and jmcb-rebuttal.
Three pairs of skills frequently get conflated; keep them distinct. jmcb-identification owns the causal/structural argument (is the shock clean, is it supply not demand), while jmcb-empirical-design owns the data the argument runs on (construction, measurement, sample) — fix identification logic first, then harden the data, then stress both in jmcb-robustness. jmcb-referee-strategy is anticipatory (war-game objections before submission), while jmcb-rebuttal is reactive (respond to a report that arrived). jmcb-tables-figures and jmcb-internet-appendix both touch exhibits, but the first is about making the core exhibits legible and the second about what to offload — run them together near the end, after the evidence is final.
if decision_letter_arrived: -> jmcb-rebuttal
elif anticipating_objections: -> jmcb-referee-strategy
elif ready_to_submit: -> jmcb-submission
elif appendix_thin_or_overloaded: -> jmcb-internet-appendix
elif exhibits_unclear: -> jmcb-tables-figures
elif results_fragile: -> jmcb-robustness
elif data_or_measurement_weak: -> jmcb-empirical-design
elif identification_shaky: -> jmcb-identification
elif contribution_fuzzy: -> jmcb-literature-positioning
else: -> jmcb-topic-selection
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin jmcb-skillsRoutes Journal of Banking & Finance manuscripts to the appropriate sub-skill across the publication lifecycle: topic fit, literature positioning, identification strategy, data analysis, exhibits, submission, review, and rebuttal.
Evaluates manuscript fit for Journal of Money, Credit and Banking (JMCB), covering scope, method-and-evidence bar, house style, and desk-reject risks for money/banking/monetary-policy/macro-finance papers.
Routes manuscript workflow for Journal of Monetary Economics submissions, directing users to the appropriate jme-* sub-skill based on current stage (topic selection, identification, data analysis, etc.).