name: journal-recommender description: Recommend academic journals based on manuscript topic, abstract, and impact factor expectations. Use when the user wants to find suitable journals for their research manuscript, especially when they provide a topic, abstract, and target Impact Factor. license: MIT author: aipoch
Journal Recommender
When to Use
- Use this skill when the request matches its documented task boundary.
- Use it when the user can provide the required inputs and expects a structured deliverable.
- Prefer this skill for repeatable, checklist-driven execution rather than open-ended brainstorming.
Key Features
- Scope-focused workflow aligned to: Recommend academic journals based on manuscript topic, abstract, and impact factor expectations. Use when the user wants to find suitable journals for their research manuscript, especially when they provide a topic, abstract, and target Impact Factor.
- Packaged executable path(s):
scripts/journal_ranker.py. - Structured execution path designed to keep outputs consistent and reviewable.
Dependencies
Python:3.10+. Repository baseline for current packaged skills.Third-party packages:not explicitly version-pinned in this skill package. Add pinned versions if this skill needs stricter environment control.
Example Usage
See ## Usage above for related details.
cd "20260316/scientific-skills/Others/journal-recommender"
python -m py_compile scripts/journal_ranker.py
python scripts/journal_ranker.py --help
Example run plan:
- Confirm the user input, output path, and any required config values.
- Edit the in-file
CONFIGblock or documented parameters if the script uses fixed settings. - Run
python scripts/journal_ranker.pywith the validated inputs. - Review the generated output and return the final artifact with any assumptions called out.
Implementation Details
See ## Overview above for related details.
- Execution model: validate the request, choose the packaged workflow, and produce a bounded deliverable.
- Input controls: confirm the source files, scope limits, output format, and acceptance criteria before running any script.
- Primary implementation surface:
scripts/journal_ranker.py. - Parameters to clarify first: input path, output path, scope filters, thresholds, and any domain-specific constraints.
- Output discipline: keep results reproducible, identify assumptions explicitly, and avoid undocumented side effects.
Overview
This skill analyzes a research manuscript (topic, abstract, and optional full text) to extract key information (keywords, field, workload, innovation) and recommends journals in three categories: Sprint (High), Robust (Match), and Safe (Low).
Workflow
-
Assess Manuscript:
- Analyze the provided
topicandabstract. - Extract keywords and determine the specific research field.
- Evaluate the workload and innovation of the study.
- Estimate the manuscript's potential Impact Factor (IF).
- Analyze the provided
-
Recommend Journals:
- Based on the assessment and the user's
target_if, search for and recommend journals. - Categorize recommendations into:
- Sprint Journals: IF slightly higher than target (max +5).
- Robust Journals: IF matches the target and assessment.
- Safe Journals: IF lower than target, ensuring high acceptance chance.
- Ensure at least 5 journals per category.
- Constraint: Do not recommend journals from the CAS warning list.
- Based on the assessment and the user's
Usage
Inputs
topic(Required): The title or topic of the manuscript.abstract(Required): The abstract of the manuscript.target_if(Required): The expected Impact Factor (number).manuscript(Optional): Full text of the manuscript.article_type(Default: "research article"): Type of the article.
Deterministic Operations
- Sorting: The recommended journals are sorted by Impact Factor in descending order using
scripts/journal_ranker.py.
Quality Rules
- IF Sorting: Journals must be strictly sorted by IF.
- Safety: No CAS warning journals are allowed.
- Quantity: Minimum 5 journals per category.
When Not to Use
- Do not use this skill when the required source data, identifiers, files, or credentials are missing.
- Do not use this skill when the user asks for fabricated results, unsupported claims, or out-of-scope conclusions.
- Do not use this skill when a simpler direct answer is more appropriate than the documented workflow.
Required Inputs
- A clearly specified task goal aligned with the documented scope.
- All required files, identifiers, parameters, or environment variables before execution.
- Any domain constraints, formatting requirements, and expected output destination if applicable.
Output Contract
- Return a structured deliverable that is directly usable without reformatting.
- If a file is produced, prefer a deterministic output name such as
journal_recommender_result.mdunless the skill documentation defines a better convention. - Include a short validation summary describing what was checked, what assumptions were made, and any remaining limitations.
Validation and Safety Rules
- Validate required inputs before execution and stop early when mandatory fields or files are missing.
- Do not fabricate measurements, references, findings, or conclusions that are not supported by the provided source material.
- Emit a clear warning when credentials, privacy constraints, safety boundaries, or unsupported requests affect the result.
- Keep the output safe, reproducible, and within the documented scope at all times.
Failure Handling
- If validation fails, explain the exact missing field, file, or parameter and show the minimum fix required.
- If an external dependency or script fails, surface the command path, likely cause, and the next recovery step.
- If partial output is returned, label it clearly and identify which checks could not be completed.
Quick Validation
Run this minimal verification path before full execution when possible:
python scripts/journal_ranker.py --help
Expected output format:
Result file: journal_recommender_result.md
Validation summary: PASS/FAIL with brief notes
Assumptions: explicit list if any