pipeline
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy + statsmodels + linearmodels + pyfixest +…
Find and assess datasets for a research question. Dispatches Explorer agents to search across data source categories, then Explorer-Critic to stress-test each candidate. Produces a ranked list with feasibility grades. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to
$ npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills --skill data-finder --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/data-finderContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Find and assess datasets for a research question. Dispatches Explorer agents to search across data source categories, then Explorer-Critic to stress-test each candidate. Produces a ranked list with feasibility grades. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to
name: data-finder description: >- Find and assess datasets for a research question. Dispatches Explorer agents to search across data source categories, then Explorer-Critic to stress-test each candidate. Produces a ranked list with feasibility grades. Make sure to use this skill whenever the user wants to identify or evaluate data sources — not to search for papers or run analysis. Triggers include: "find data", "what data should I use", "find a dataset for this", "where can I get data on X", "assess datasets", "what datasets exist for", "help me find data", "is there data on this", "what are my data options", "I need data for this project", or any request to locate empirical data sources for a research question. argument-hint: "[research topic or 'from spec']" allowed-tools: ["Read", "Grep", "Glob", "Write", "WebSearch", "WebFetch", "Task"]
Find and assess datasets for your research question. Two Explorer agents search in parallel across data source categories; an Explorer-Critic then stress-tests each candidate against the research design.
**Input:** `$ARGUMENTS` — a topic, or `from spec` to read the research question from `quality_reports/`.
---
1. Find the most recent `quality_reports/project_spec_*.md` or `quality_reports/specs/*.md` — extract:
2. Read `references/domain-profile.md` if it exists — extract the Common Datasets section (domain-specific datasets to check first).
3. If no research spec exists, extract the variables and strategy from `$ARGUMENTS` directly. If the request is vague, ask: *"What are the treatment and outcome variables, and what empirical strategy did you have in mind?"*
---
Split the source categories between two Explorer agents to parallelize the search.
**Explorer A — Institutional Data:**
Task prompt: "You are an Explorer agent. Research question: [question]. Empirical strategy: [strategy]. Variables needed — Treatment: [X], Outcome: [Y], Controls: [list], Time period: [period], Geography: [geo], Unit: [unit]. Domain datasets (check first): [list from domain-profile if available]. Your source categories to search: 1. Public microdata (CPS, ACS, NHIS, MEPS, SIPP, QWI) 2. Administrative data (Medicare/Medicaid, IRS, SSA, vital statistics, court records) 3. Survey panels (PSID, HRS, Add Health, NLSY97/79, BHPS/UKHLS) For each dataset found, produce the full Explorer report format. Follow the Explorer agent instructions."
**Explorer B — Broader and Alternative Sources:**
Task prompt: "You are an Explorer agent. Research question: [question]. Empirical strategy: [strategy]. Variables needed — Treatment: [X], Outcome: [Y], Controls: [list], Time period: [period], Geography: [geo], Unit: [unit]. Domain datasets (check first): [list from domain-profile if available]. Your source categories to search: 1. International data (World Bank, OECD, Eurostat, IMF, IPUMS International) 2. Novel/alternative (satellite, web scraping, proprietary, RCT registries) 3. Any field-specific datasets not covered by Explorer A For each dataset found, produce the full Explorer report format. Follow the Explorer agent instructions."
---
After both Explorer agents complete, dispatch the Explorer-Critic with the full combined dataset list.
Task prompt: "You are an Explorer-Critic agent. Research question: [question]. Empirical strategy: [strategy]. Variables needed — Treatment: [X], Outcome: [Y], Controls: [list], Time period: [period], Geography: [geo], Unit: [unit]. Here is the combined dataset list from the Explorer agents: [paste all Explorer findings] Apply the 5-point critique to each dataset: 1. Measurement validity 2. Sample selection 3. External validity 4. Identification compatibility 5. Known issues Produce adjusted feasibility grades and deal-breaker flags. Follow the Explorer-Critic agent instructions."
---
After the Explorer-Critic completes, compile the final ranked report:
1. Sort datasets by adjusted feasibility grade (A first, then B, then C, then D). 2. Within each grade, sort by identification compatibility score (highest first). 3. Separate out deal-breaker datasets into the rejection table.
---
Save to `quality_reports/data_exploration_[sanitized_topic].md`:
# Data Exploration: [Topic] **Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD] **Research question:** [one sentence] **Empirical strategy:** [method] **Variables sought:** Treatment = [X], Outcome = [Y], Controls = [list] --- ## Top Candidates (Grade A–B) ### 1. [Dataset Name] — Grade: A/B **Provider:** [Name] | **Access:** [Public/Restricted/etc.] | **URL:** [link] **Coverage:** [time period] | [geography] | [unit of observation] | N ≈ [size] **Key Variables:** - Treatment proxy: [variable] - Outcome: [variable] - Controls available: [list] **Explorer-Critic Assessment:** - Measurement validity: [1-2 sentences] - Sample selection: [1-2 sentences] - External validity: [1-2 sentences] - Identification compatibility: [focused on the proposed strategy] - Known issues: [specific documented problems] **Bottom line:** [1-2 sentences — viable and under what conditions] --- [Repeat for all A and B grade datasets] --- ## Accessible With Effort (Grade C) [Brief summaries — name, access path, main limitation, why C not B] --- ## Rejection Table | Dataset | Reason for Rejection | Deal-breaker? | |---------|---------------------|---------------| | [Name] | [Explorer-Critic finding] | YES/NO | --- ## Recommended Path Forward 1. **Best dataset:** [Name] — [o
📌 文档结构(2026-07-22 起): 本文件是中文默认入口 —— banner + badges + 信任面 + 9 阶段流水线速览 + 76 行合集总表。 每个合集的完整描述、按用途分组、精确数字、验证方法在 docs/CONTENT_ZH.md(扩展正文,总表行内的 → 直接跳转到对应锚点)。 English version: README-en.md · 中文扩展正文:docs/CONTENT_ZH.md · README-zh-CN.md 已弃用(重定向占位) 🌐 语言: English |
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy + statsmodels + linearmodels + pyfixest +…
Use when the user asks to run a full empirical / causal analysis in Python — by default in the style of an applied economics paper (AER / QJE / JPE / ReStud /…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Python econometric stack — pandas + numpy + scipy + statsmodels + linearmodels + pyfixest +…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the traditional Stata ecosystem — native Stata + reghdfe + ivreg2 + csdid + did_imputation +…
Classical end-to-end empirical analysis workflow in the modern tidyverse + econometrics R ecosystem — dplyr + tidyr + haven + fixest + sandwich + lmtest +…
Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want…