brycewang-stanford/review-r
skills/41-sticerd-eee-sewage-econometrics-check/skills/review-r/SKILL.md
R code review for the sewage project. Checks script structure, reproducibility, function design, figure quality, and professional polish against project conventions (here::here, arrow/parquet, fixest, modelsummary, native pipe). This skill should be used when asked to "review the code", "check my script", or "code review".
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research review-rInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: May 20, 2026, 4:59 AM105.3s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- review-r
- description:
- R code review for the sewage project. Checks script structure, reproducibility, function design, figure quality, and professional polish against project conventions (here::here, arrow/parquet, fixest, modelsummary, native pipe). This skill should be used when asked to "review the code", "check my script", or "code review".
- argument-hint:
- [filename, directory, or 'all']
- allowed-tools:
- ["Read", "Grep", "Glob", "Write", "Agent"]
Review R Code
Run a code quality review on R scripts in the sewage project. Produces a report — does NOT edit source files.
Input: $ARGUMENTS — a .R filename, directory path, or all.
Project-Specific Conventions
Script Structure
Pipeline scripts (layers 01-06):
Header block (########) → roxygen description → initialise_environment() → setup_logging() → CONFIG list → functions → main() → conditional execution (sys.nframe() == 0)
Analysis scripts (09_analysis):
Numbered sections with # === separators, inline package loading, direct execution (no main() wrapper)
Required Conventions
- Paths:
here::here()— never relative paths orsetwd() - Data formats:
arrow(parquet) for intermediate/final; DuckDB for large joins - Pipe: Native R pipe
|>(not%>%) - Naming:
snake_casefor functions/variables,UPPER_SNAKE_CASEfor constants - Econometrics:
fixest::feols()for regressions - Tables:
modelsummary→ LaTeX withtabularrayformat - SE:
vcov = "hetero"for heteroskedasticity-robust - Factors:
forcats::as_factor()/forcats::fct_drop()
Key Files
- Scripts:
scripts/R/01_data_ingestion/throughscripts/R/09_analysis/ - Utilities:
scripts/R/utils/ - Output:
output/{figures,tables,html_plots,regs,log}/
Workflow
Step 1: Identify Scripts
- If
$ARGUMENTSis a specific.Rfile: review that file - If
$ARGUMENTSis a directory: review all.Rfiles in that directory - If
$ARGUMENTSisall: review all scripts inscripts/R/ - If no argument: ask which scripts to review
Step 2: Review Each Script (9 Categories)
Category 1: Script Structure
- Pipeline scripts: header block, roxygen,
initialise_environment(),CONFIGlist,main(), conditional execution - Analysis scripts: numbered sections with
# ===separators - Clear separation of concerns
Category 2: Console Hygiene
- No unnecessary
print()/cat()pollution - Logging via
setup_logging()in pipeline scripts - Clean output — only meaningful messages
Category 3: Reproducibility
set.seed()where randomness is involved- All paths via
here::here()— nosetwd(), no relative paths, no hardcoded absolute paths - No hardcoded values that should be in CONFIG
Category 4: Function Design
- DRY — no duplicated code blocks
- Functions at appropriate abstraction level
- Shared utilities in
scripts/R/utils/where reuse is needed
Category 5: Figure Quality
- Axis labels present and readable
- Appropriate dimensions (not too wide/narrow)
- Consistent theme across plots
- Alpha transparency for overlapping points
- Saved to
output/figures/viahere::here()
Category 6: Data Persistence
- Intermediate results saved as parquet (
arrow::write_parquet()) saveRDS()for R-specific objects- No orphaned temporary files
Category 7: Comments
- Explain why, not what
- Section headers for navigation
- No commented-out dead code
Category 8: Error Handling
- Graceful failures with informative messages in pipeline scripts
- File existence checks before reading
- Data validation where appropriate
Category 9: Polish
- Consistent style (indentation, spacing)
- No dead code or unused imports
- Clean namespace —
library()calls at top - Native pipe
|>(not magrittr%>%)
Step 3: Present Summary
## Code Review: [filename/directory]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Scripts reviewed:** N
### Issues by Severity
| Script | Critical | Major | Minor |
|--------|----------|-------|-------|
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
### Top 3 Critical Issues
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...
### Conventions Compliance
- [ ] here::here() for all paths
- [ ] Native pipe |>
- [ ] arrow/parquet for data
- [ ] fixest for regressions
- [ ] modelsummary for tables
### Score: XX / 100
Save report to output/log/code_review_[target].md.
Step 4: IMPORTANT
Do NOT edit any source files. Only produce reports. Fixes are applied after user review.
Principles
- Report only, never edit. The reviewer is a critic, not a creator.
- Project conventions matter. Flag deviations from the conventions above, not personal preferences.
- Proportional severity. A missing
set.seed()is Major. A missing comment is Minor. Usingsetwd()is Critical. - Language-specific. Check R idioms — vectorised operations over loops, tidyverse patterns, proper use of factors.
- Pipeline vs analysis distinction. Different structure expectations for pipeline scripts vs analysis scripts.
Related Skills
brycewang-stanford/thematic-analysis
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/slr-prisma
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/running-placebo-analysis
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026
brycewang-stanford/running-causalpy-experiments
data-ai
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.
1,685SKILL.mdUpdated Jun 5, 2026