Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› est-topic-selection
est-topic-selection
GitHub评估研究是否契合ES&T期刊，聚焦环境显著性与变革性。通过四步测试验证真实系统相关性、新颖见解及跨学科影响，辅助决定投稿类型（如Research Article或Letters），并基于决策表建议是否转投专业期刊。
Trigger Scenarios
判断研究是否适合ES&T而非其他专业或快速发表渠道
将模糊想法转化为具有环境显著性的科学问题
在Research Article和ES&T Letters之间选择文章类型
担心工作被视为常规数据或纯方法学开发
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill est-topic-selection -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "est-topic-selection",
"description": "Use when deciding whether a problem fits Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T) and which article type to target. ES&T rewards demonstrated environmental significance and transformational, direction-setting work over incremental lab results, so this skill pressure-tests the \"so what for the environment?\" question before you invest. It frames the contribution; it does not run experiments."
}
Topic Selection & Fit (est-topic-selection)
ES&T "aims to be transformational and direction-setting." The single most common reason a sound study is off-fit is missing environmental significance: a clean measurement or a new material with no demonstrated relevance to a real environmental system. Decide fit before you invest.
When to trigger
- Choosing whether ES&T (vs a specialist or rapid venue) is the right home
- Sharpening a vague idea into an environmentally significant question
- Deciding between a full Research Article and the rapid ES&T Letters
- Worried the work reads as "routine data" or method-for-its-own-sake
The environmental-significance test
- Real system, real relevance. Does the work illuminate fate, transport, transformation, exposure, toxicity, treatment, or management in a natural or engineered environment — at environmentally relevant concentrations, matrices, and conditions?
- Novel insight, not routine data. ES&T expects novel insights into relevant environmental processes, not a catalog of measurements or a well-understood phenomenon re-measured.
- Multidisciplinary reach. Will the broad ES&T audience (chemists, engineers, toxicologists, policymakers) care — beyond your sub-specialty?
- Direction-setting. Does it change how people measure, model, treat, or regulate something?
Match to article type
- Research Article — full original study with environmental significance.
- ES&T Letters — urgent and impactful short result that should not wait (separate companion journal).
- Critical Review — comprehensive, analytical synthesis that identifies gaps (not a summary).
- Perspective — forward-looking, focused opinion/synthesis.
- Feature — accessible, magazine-style treatment for the broad community.
- Policy Analysis — science/engineering at the policy interface (risk, regulation, cost-benefit).
Fit-versus-redirect decision table
Use this to decide quickly whether ES&T is the home, or whether the work belongs at a specialist or rapid venue. The recurring failure is mistaking a sound measurement for a direction-setting finding:
| Your work is... | ES&T fit | Better home |
|---|---|---|
| Occurrence data with no process/exposure insight | weak | a specialist monitoring journal |
| Mechanism/attribution that changes how a system is managed | strong | ES&T Research Article |
| Urgent, high-impact, short result | redirect | ES&T Letters |
| Pure analytical-method development, no environmental question | weak | an analytical-chemistry journal |
| Synthesis identifying field-wide gaps | strong | ES&T Critical Review |
| Science at the regulation/cost-benefit interface | strong | ES&T Policy Analysis |
Worked micro-example (illustrative — three framings of one PFAS dataset)
The same field campaign can be off-fit or on-fit depending on the question (illustrative):
- Off-fit: "We report 14 PFAS at 8 river sites." Occurrence catalog → reads as routine data, a likely desk decline at a direction-setting journal.
- Borderline: "PFAS concentrations correlate with upstream industrial land use." A pattern, but no process insight or consequence — a reviewer asks "so what changes?"
- On-fit: "In-stream biotransformation of precursors raises terminal-acid exposure ~40% (illustrative) below discharges, so occurrence surveys systematically under-count persistent burden — monitoring should target precursors." Now it sets direction for how the field measures PFAS.
The single test that sorts these: can you finish the sentence "this changes how people measure, model, treat, or regulate the system because…"? If not, sharpen the question before investing.
Anti-patterns
- "We measured X in Y" with no significance argument for an environmental system
- Idealized lab spikes far from environmental concentrations/matrices, presented as field-relevant
- A method paper with no environmental question driving it
- Sending incremental or confirmatory work to a direction-setting journal
- Picking ES&T Letters for work that is not genuinely urgent/time-sensitive
Output format
【Question】one-sentence environmental question
【Significance】fate/transport/exposure/treatment/policy relevance to a real system
【Novel insight】what is new (not routine data)
【Audience reach】who beyond my sub-area cares
【Article type】Research Article / ES&T Letters / Critical Review / Perspective / Feature / Policy Analysis
【Next】est-literature-positioning
Supplementary resources
../../resources/external_tools.md— environmental data sources to scope feasibility../../resources/official-source-map.md— ES&T scope, aims, and article types
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 13:12
