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 atc-supplementarygit 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/atc-supplementary)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/atc-supplementary"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/atc-supplementary/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/atc-supplementary"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills/atc-supplementary.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 | $0.00076 | $0.01027 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00411 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00205 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
atc-supplementary 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 — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ATC Supplementary
ATC gives you four places to put content, each read by a different reviewer under a different rule: the two-page extended abstract (round one, two reviewers), the 12-page body (round two, 3-4 reviewers), the appendix (optional reading), and the artifact (opened during round two and evaluated post-acceptance). Placing content correctly is a strategic decision, not a formatting one, because reviewers are not required to read the appendix and a round-one reviewer may read only the abstract.
The placement rule
Anything that decides acceptance goes in a place the deciding reviewer is required to read.
- Round-one acceptance is decided from the extended abstract → the problem, contribution, headline result, and honest cost must be in the abstract.
- Round-two acceptance is decided from the body → every load-bearing design detail, baseline, and result must be in the 12 pages.
- The appendix holds support a curious reviewer may consult — extra graphs, proofs, parameter tables — never a result the verdict depends on.
- The artifact holds runnable evidence and full data — it strengthens trust and earns badges, but the paper must be judgeable without executing it.
What goes where
| Content | Home | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Problem, contribution, testbed, headline result, key cost | Extended abstract | The round-one decision surface; must stand alone |
| Design rationale, implementation, main experiments, fair baselines, tails/variance | Body (≤12 pp) | The round-two decision surface; nothing acceptance-critical may leave it |
| Extra sensitivity graphs, parameter sweeps, proofs, extended tables | Appendix | Optional depth; reviewers not required to read it |
| Full code, traces/datasets, configs, claim-to-experiment scripts | Artifact | Runnable evidence + badge material; paper still judged without running it |
The extended abstract is not a teaser
The most common ATC mistake is treating the extended abstract as a marketing blurb that depends on
the paper. It is a self-contained argument that must survive being read instead of the paper
(see atc-writing-style). Move the real problem, the real contribution, and a real result into it;
do not defer them to "as shown in the paper."
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 · 79 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A 35f5163100ab
atc-supplementary is a skill published in the GitHub repository brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills (1,264 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 1,027 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
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…
research-manager
Use this when starting a new research project or managing a complex, multi-step research workflow.
alterlab-phylogenetics
Build phylogenetic trees end-to-end from raw sequences — MAFFT multiple sequence alignment, optional TrimAl trimming, IQ-TREE 3 maximum-likelihood inference with model selection and bootstraps, FastTree for large datasets, then visualize with ETE3 or FigTree. Use when reconstructing trees from sequences (FASTA) for…
alterlab-pydicom
Reads, writes, and manipulates DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) medical imaging files with the pydicom Python library. Use when reading/writing/modifying DICOM data, extracting pixel data from CT, MRI, X-ray, or ultrasound images, anonymizing DICOM files, working with DICOM metadata and tags…
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…