Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› communications-earth-and-environment
communications-earth-and-environment
GitHub用于评估地球、环境及行星科学论文是否符合Communications Earth & Environment期刊的收录标准。提供选题定位、框架重构建议，并依据完整性和技术严谨性要求，协助作者判断投稿适宜性或选择替代期刊。
Trigger Scenarios
作者询问稿件是否适合该期刊或需进行适配性检查
在Nature Portfolio不同期刊间权衡投稿目标
需要将专业研究重构为具有广泛影响力的跨学科内容
需要获取数据可用性报告规范及替代投稿路径
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill communications-earth-and-environment -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "communications-earth-and-environment",
"description": "Use when targeting Communications Earth & Environment or deciding whether an earth, environmental, or planetary-science manuscript fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the solid-and-complete-advance bar, Nature Portfolio reporting\/data standards, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics."
}
Communications Earth & Environment (communications-earth-and-environment)
Journal positioning
Communications Earth & Environment is the Nature Portfolio open-access journal that
publishes high-quality research from across the earth, environmental, and planetary
sciences. Its defining expectation is a solid, complete, and broadly framed advance:
the work must be technically rigorous and represent a meaningful step for its field, but it
need not clear the flagship-Nature bar of transformative significance that
nature-geoscience and nature-climate-change demand. A result that is sound and useful
to its specialist community but framed only for that community — with no articulated
interest for the wider earth-and-environment readership — is a weak fit. This skill is a
fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current
author guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live Communications Earth & Environment
submission guidance.
When to trigger
- The author names Communications Earth & Environment and wants a fit/framing check for an earth or environmental science paper.
- A solid, complete result is being weighed against more selective Nature Portfolio venues
(
nature-geoscience,nature-climate-change) and needs a realistic-tier decision. - A specialist contribution must be re-framed to articulate broad earth/environment relevance for an open-access, cross-disciplinary readership.
- The author needs the journal's reporting/data-availability expectations and a credible alternative route.
Scope & topic fit
- Solid-earth and planetary science: tectonics, geochemistry, geophysics, volcanology, and planetary processes when the advance is complete and broadly relevant.
- Climate and atmospheric science: variability, change, dynamics, and palaeoclimate, with rigorous analysis appropriate to the claim.
- Oceanography, cryosphere, and hydrosphere processes, including observation- and model-based studies.
- Environmental science and human–environment interactions: pollution, land use, biogeochemistry, and sustainability framed for an earth-system audience.
- Natural hazards, surface processes, and Earth-observation studies with a generalizable finding rather than a single local report.
- Methods, datasets, and syntheses that meaningfully advance how the field observes or models the Earth system.
Method & evidence bar
- The study must be complete and self-contained: a finished advance, not a preliminary fragment promising follow-up work.
- Technical rigor is judged at the specialist level — appropriate sampling, statistics, error characterization, and reproducible processing — even though significance need not be flagship-tier.
- Modeling work needs stated assumptions, evaluation against data or established baselines, and uncertainty/sensitivity treatment.
- Observational and field studies need defensible design, representativeness, and clear separation of signal from noise.
- Claims of novelty or improvement require honest comparison with prior work, not a strawman.
- Data and code underlying the conclusions are expected to be openly deposited per Nature reporting and data-availability policy.
Structure & house style
- Nature Portfolio open-access format with a brief, significance-forward abstract; re-check current article types and length expectations on the live guide.
- The introduction must state the field gap and why the result matters beyond the immediate specialty, addressing a broad earth/environment readership.
- Main display items should carry the central argument; specialist and supporting detail moves to supplementary information.
- Methods must be detailed and reproducible; a reporting summary and data/code-availability statements are required per Nature policy.
- Writing should be accessible across earth and environmental subfields, avoiding jargon that locks out adjacent readers.
Official-submission checklist
- Before giving submission-ready advice, read
../../resources/source-basis.mdand../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the Nature Portfolio anchors, then cite the current Communications Earth & Environment page you checked. - Search the live site for "Communications Earth & Environment submission guidelines" and follow the current version.
- Re-check article types, abstract/format expectations, the reporting summary, and the data/code-availability policy.
- Confirm open-access terms, licensing, and any transparent-peer-review options.
- Re-check competing-interests, funding, author-contribution, and AI-use disclosure.
- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.
Pre-submission self-check
- The advance is solid and complete, not a preliminary fragment awaiting follow-up.
- Significance is framed for a broad earth/environment readership, with specialist detail in SI.
- Methods, statistics, and error characterization meet specialist-level rigor.
- Modeling assumptions, evaluation, and uncertainty/sensitivity are explicit.
- Novelty/improvement is shown by honest comparison with prior work.
- Data/code are openly deposited and the Nature reporting summary is addressed.
Common desk-reject triggers
- A sound result framed only for one specialty, with no articulated broad relevance.
- Incomplete or preliminary work presented as a finished advance.
- Opaque modeling with no evaluation, baseline, or uncertainty treatment.
- Observational study with weak design, unrepresentative sampling, or signal/noise confusion.
- Missing or non-compliant open data/code where Nature policy requires it.
- Over-claiming flagship-level significance the evidence does not support (or, conversely, under-framing so the broad interest is invisible).
Re-routing decision
- Transformative, agenda-setting significance in solid earth →
nature-geoscience. - Flagship climate-impact or climate-policy significance →
nature-climate-change. - Short, high-immediacy geoscience letter →
geologyorgeophysical-research-letters. - A documented, reusable dataset is the actual product →
earth-system-science-data. - Broad multidisciplinary advance beyond earth science →
science-advances.
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Communications Earth & Environment
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest earth/environment topics>
[Completeness] <is this a finished, self-contained advance?>
[Broad relevance] <why it matters beyond the immediate specialty>
[Method/evidence] <does specialist-level rigor + data deposition clear the bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <article type / reporting summary / data policy / OA terms / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 12:17
