Awesome Journal Skills is a collection of agent skill packs tailored to hundreds of academic journals across fields including economics, social science, medicine, science, and engineering. Researchers use the packs for tasks such as choosing topics, designing empirical strategies, preparing tables and figures, submitting papers, and responding to reviewers. The catalogue entries are the project's journal-specific skills and related plugins.
Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill amann-writing-stylegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-SkillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/amann-writing-style)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/amann-writing-style"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/amann-writing-style/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/amann-writing-style"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/amann-writing-style.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00082 | $0.01290 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00033 | $0.00516 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00258 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00129 |
Grade A, and why
amann-writing-style scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 72 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Annals Writing Style — "Reviews with an Attitude" (amann-writing-style)
When to trigger
- The framework and evidence appraisal are settled and it is time to make the review read well
- The draft is descriptive and balanced but has no voice, no position, no agenda
- The opening buries the field's problem under throat-clearing or method machinery
- The abstract reads like a paper abstract ("we find…") rather than a review abstract
The Annals voice: authoritative + integrative + has attitude
Annals is read by management and organization scholars across subfields, plus allied audiences (organizational psychology, sociology of organizations). The voice is that of a trusted, fair expert who has read the whole field and is willing to say what it got right, what it got wrong, and what to do next. Four qualities define it:
- Authoritative. Confident judgments about what is known, contested, and how good the evidence is. The reader wants the author's appraisal, not neutrality-as-evasion — but authority is earned by comprehensiveness and balance, never asserted.
- Has attitude. This is the Annals signature. The review takes a critical, potentially provocative position grounded in the evidence: it names the field's blind spots, over-studied questions, and conceptual confusions. A balanced, accurate, positionless review is the most common stylistic miss.
- Integrative, not descriptive. Sentences make streams talk to each other ("Whereas the X tradition treats … as …, the Y stream implies …"), reorganizing the field rather than touring it stream by stream.
- Agenda-setting. The review points forward. The payoff is what becomes researchable after it — propositions, open questions, a future-research roadmap tied to the framework's empty cells.
The Annals opening arc
An Annals introduction differs from a research-paper intro and even from a generic review:
frame the field and its problem (what it studies, and the specific way it is fragmented/contradictory/confused) → why a review is needed now (a wave of work, a method shift, a hardened debate) → the organizing framework (the new way of seeing the field — the map the reader is given) → the position and the agenda (the "attitude" and what the review will conclude the field should do) → roadmap (brief).
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 72 lines · 82 tokens per session scan A 27ea66d359a8
amann-writing-style is a skill published in the GitHub repository brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills (1,289 stars, last pushed 26d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 82 tokens to every session and 1,290 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-15.
Other skills, from other repositories
research-manager
Use this when starting a new research project or managing a complex, multi-step research workflow.
alterlab-qiime2-amplicon
Runs 16S/ITS amplicon (microbiome) analysis with the QIIME 2 distribution (2026.7; the "amplicon" distribution was renamed "qiime2" in 2026.4) in the correct order: manifest import, cutadapt trim-paired primer removal BEFORE dada2 denoise-paired (trunc-len chosen from the demux quality .qzv), feature-classifier…
alterlab-pyhealth
Develops, tests, and validates clinical machine learning models with the PyHealth 2.x healthcare AI toolkit. Use when working with electronic health records (EHR), clinical prediction tasks (mortality, readmission, length of stay, drug recommendation), medical coding systems (ICD, NDC, ATC, CCS), physiological signals…
alterlab-citation-verifier
Verifies that every bibliography entry actually exists by cross-checking Crossref, OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar, and arXiv (no API key required) plus doi.org DOI registration, fuzzy-matching title and authors (difflib ratio >= 0.70), flagging retractions recorded by Crossref (including Retraction Watch data) or…
alterlab-timesfm
Forecasts time series zero-shot with Google's TimesFM foundation models — TimesFM 2.5 (200M, Apache-2.0 weights; ForecastConfig API, XReg covariates) and TimesFM 3.0 (330M, multivariate with native past/future covariates; non-commercial weights) — producing point forecasts and quantile prediction intervals from…
alterlab-anndata
Build, slice, concatenate, read, and write AnnData annotated data matrices (obs, var, X, layers, obsm, uns) — the scverse data STRUCTURE, not an analysis pipeline. Use when creating or wrangling .h5ad/zarr files, managing cell and gene annotations, concatenating batches, or handling layers/obsm/backed-mode; for the…