Economics Writing Skills
Five Codex skills for economics papers in English and Chinese: tables, figures and multi-agent manuscript review
- 220 ★ on the repository
- Last commit
Minimal access
Why this level
- The skills read the manuscript and write its versions and reports to disk; the check programs run locally
Install
- Works in
In your terminal, with SkillFoxx CLI
npx skillfoxx add skills/economics-writing-skillsDetects the agents on your machine, shows the access level and pins the version.
Other ways to install
Access and checks
How we reviewMinimal accessThe tool runs nothing and makes no network calls.
- The skills read the manuscript and write its versions and reports to disk; the check programs run locally
This is third-party code. Review the repository files before installing.
What it does
Economics Writing Skills is a set of five Codex skills for writing economics papers in English and Chinese: outlines and research proposals, full drafts, revisions, referee responses, tables and figures. The main skill, econ-writing-workflow, picks the right one among the others: econ-write for English text, cn-top-econ-writing for Chinese, econ-table-figure-design for three-line tables, regressions and charts (event study, binscatter, maps). For full manuscripts, econ-writing-workflow-multiagent applies: independent agents review meaning, evidence, definitions and economic reasoning, while six Python programs handle what is reproducible. They build review packets with file hashes, check coverage and file versions, measure content changes, reconcile citations with the bibliography and check figure labels. The author stresses that the research question, evidence and conclusions stay with the human, and the repository carries an ethical-use note.
Who it is for. Economists, graduate students and editors who write and revise economics papers in English or Chinese and use Codex.
Good fit when
- An introduction must be rewritten so the question and contribution read at once
- Regressions and robustness checks need three-line tables and labels
- A finished manuscript is checked by independent agents and scripts reconcile citations with the bibliography
- A referee response and revisions are prepared with a check that no content is lost
Not a fit when
- An environment without independent reviewer agents: the multi-agent module requires one
- The task is from another field: the instructions and references are written for economics papers
- You want a paper with no author involvement: research judgments stay with the human
Example request
Use econ-writing-workflow to revise this paper's introduction so the research question and contribution are clear from page oneLimitations
The skills target Codex and install into ~/.codex/skills/; for other agents check the format yourself. The scripts run on Python 3 with only the standard library and accept UTF-8 .tex, .md and .txt sources. The full manuscript process is heavier than light tasks: it is not applied to short edits and outlines. GitHub metadata shows no detected license, so read the terms in LICENSE and NOTICE.md.
How to disable. Delete the five skill folders from ~/.codex/skills/ (econ-writing-workflow, econ-write, cn-top-econ-writing, econ-table-figure-design, econ-writing-workflow-multiagent) and restart Codex.
FAQ
Which skills are included?
Five: econ-writing-workflow (router), econ-write (English), cn-top-econ-writing (Chinese), econ-table-figure-design (tables and figures) and econ-writing-workflow-multiagent (full manuscript review with agents and scripts).
What do the Python programs do?
Six programs prepare review packets with file hashes, check coverage and versions, compare length and content against agreed limits, reconcile citations, literature records and the bibliography, and check figure labels and reviewer records.
How do I install the skills?
In a Codex conversation ask it to download and install the five skill folders from the repository, or copy them by hand with cp -R into ~/.codex/skills/. If the skills do not appear, restart Codex.
Which models does the author recommend?
For important writing and large revisions, the newest OpenAI and Anthropic models; for Chinese wording you can also try DeepSeek or Kimi and compare the result with the original to confirm the meaning is intact.
Does it replace the author?
No. The author sets the research question, interprets the evidence and makes the decisions; the agent helps with text and the programs check what can be checked repeatably. Principles are in ETHICAL_USE.md and docs/ai-assistance.md.
Discussion
No questions or reviews yet.
Related
SkillsSkill for writing economics papers, drawing on advice from more than 50 authoritative guides
A set of three research skills: paper writing, academic Word and PowerPoint documents, scientific computing and figures
Skill with 30 prompt templates for research papers in English and Chinese, from literature review to grant proposals
Skills tailored to specific academic journals that help choose a venue, prepare a paper and pass review
Многоагентный рецензент научных статей по экономике запускает панель проверяющих через Codex или Claude Code.
Eight skills for finished papers and theses in LaTeX and Typst: compile, references, language polish, cover letters and a reviewer-style audit
Comparison with similar tools
Cards that share the main search query, and how they differ.
| Tool | Official | Repository stars | Main difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Economics Writing Skills (this card) | no | 220 | |
| Academic Skills for Claude Code & Codex | no | 5,921 | a general academic work set, while this one specializes in economics with scripted citation checks |
| Research Paper Writing | no | 8,297 | guides a paper through a general scheme, while this set covers tables, figures and Chinese |
README in short
The README is bilingual: features, a five-step process for checking a full manuscript, a table of six Python programs, model choice, installation (an agent request or cp commands) and usage examples. An ethical-use note and notes on the source corpus sit separately.
README badge
Original SKILL.md
--- name: econ-writing-workflow description: Use as the main entry point for economics writing workflows in English or Chinese, including paper and research-proposal planning, monograph outlines, chapter drafting and integration, argument outlines, collaborator-facing writing-task outlines and research-team staffing briefs, scope and claim convergence, full paper drafting from research questions and result packages, major revision, document-level translation or compression, exhaustive semantic QA and final audits, abstract/introduction/results revision, Chinese top-journal adaptation, English and Chinese diction cleanup, AI/translationese removal, table and figure design, notes/captions, formatting checks, and routing to empirical workflow support when data cleaning, regressions, or variable construction are involved. --- # Economics Writing Workflow ## Role Use this skill as the user's main entry point for economics writing work. It does not replace the specialized skills; it routes the task to the right writing module, keeps the workflow ordered, and checks that the final output matches the user's target. This skill is not a full empirical pipeline. For data cleaning, variable construction, regression code, estimation, diagnostics, or reproducibility tasks, pair with `empirical-econ-workflow`. ## Deliverable Type Identify the requested deliverable separately from the work stage: discussion or argument outline, research proposal, collaborator-facing writing-task outline, research-team staffing brief, or manuscript prose. A writing-task outline is meant to contain reading assignments, argument steps and figure/table production instructions; do not strip them out using manuscript-only voice rules. Keep internal edit history and agent bookkeeping out of the handed-off outline. For paper/book or proposal outlines, writing-task outlines, or research-team staffing briefs, load `references/outlines/01_argument_and_writing_task_outlines.md`. Preserve the accepted framework and use the outline's purpose to choose its level of detail. An outline alone does not trigger complete-paper drafting or exhaustive complete-manuscript QA requirements. Existing author-intent, source, empirical and write-authorization rules still apply where relevant. For an actual research proposal, continue to use the proposal-specific module rather than substituting the task-outline template. When planning a monograph, drafting a chapter or bringing separately written sections together, consult the same paper-writing references listed under Routing for the work at hand: argument logic, literature and evidence, or tables and figures. Use them when setting assignments as well as when reading drafts. For chapter roles, writing order and editorial handoff, use `references/outlines/01_argument_and_writing_task_outlines.md`. An empirical design, regression or journal-style contribution statement belongs in a book only when the chapter actually calls for it. A proposal skeleton is still an outline, not a complete proposal. For outline-only requests, check argument and display specifications; do not require produced figures, rendered-label checks, or a complete-proposal QA report when those artifacts are not being delivered. Apply the corresponding