Deepseek Reason
ruvnet/ruflo
Reasoning-mode completion against DeepSeek's deepseek-reasoner model (R1) via /v1/chat/completions.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model, the round-one…
MITAuto-check passed
Install Atc Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills atc-review-process --agent claude-codeProject scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process .claude/skills/atc-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.
Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/
Install the "atc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process into .claude/skills/atc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "atc-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Claude Code copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$skill-installer install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-processType this inside Codex. $skill-installer <name> installs a curated skill from openai/skills. The installer writes to $CODEX_HOME/skills (default ~/.codex/skills). Restart Codex if the skill does not show up.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills atc-review-process --agent codexProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .agents/skills && cp -r skills-src/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process .agents/skills/atc-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "atc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process into .agents/skills/atc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "atc-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Codex copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills atc-review-process --agent cursorProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .cursor/skills && cp -r skills-src/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process .cursor/skills/atc-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.cursor/skills/ instead of .cursor/skills for a personal install.
Cursor skills documentation · loads skills from .cursor/skills/, .agents/skills/, .claude/skills/, .codex/skills/
Install the "atc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process into .cursor/skills/atc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "atc-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Cursor copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gemini skills install https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git --path ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process--scope user (default) or --scope workspace; --path is the subfolder of the repo that holds the skill; --consent skips the security confirmation prompt.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills atc-review-process --agent gemini-cliProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .gemini/skills && cp -r skills-src/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process .gemini/skills/atc-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.gemini/skills/ instead of .gemini/skills for a personal install, then run /skills reload.
Gemini CLI skills documentation · loads skills from .gemini/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "atc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process into .gemini/skills/atc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "atc-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.Gemini CLI copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills atc-review-processInstalls for Copilot at project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Preview a skill first with gh skill preview. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a github-copilotProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.copilot/skills/.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .github/skills && cp -r skills-src/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process .github/skills/atc-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.copilot/skills/ instead of .github/skills for a personal install. Commit .github/skills so cloud agent and code review can use it.
GitHub Copilot skills documentation · loads skills from .github/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "atc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process into .github/skills/atc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "atc-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.GitHub Copilot copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a opencodeOpenCode documents no install command of its own. Project install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.config/opencode/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills atc-review-process --agent opencodeProject scope by default (.agents/skills/); add --scope user for a personal install.
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .opencode/skills && cp -r skills-src/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process .opencode/skills/atc-review-process && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.config/opencode/skills/ instead of .opencode/skills for a personal install.
OpenCode skills documentation · loads skills from .opencode/skills/, .claude/skills/, .agents/skills/
Install the "atc-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process into .opencode/skills/atc-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "atc-review-process", then confirm the skill loads.OpenCode copies the folder itself, the same result as the manual copy. Check what it changed before you commit it.
Facts
- Skill name
atc-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 711 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model, the round-one…
- Reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference
- SKILL.md covers Process model, Reading a decision against the…, How ATC differs from its… and Who reads you, plus 3 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model
What it does
Atc Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model, the round-one gate by two reviewers, the round-two read by 3-4 reviewers, double-blind reviewing, rebuttal, conditional acceptance with shepherding, and how ATC differs from OSDI/SOSP/NSDI.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.6k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
The repository describes itself as: Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的… The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference
- Formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model
- The round-one gate by two reviewers
- The round-two read by 3-4 reviewers
Example prompts
- “/atc-review-process”
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 932eb23. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Atc Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 93 tokens; SKILL.md has 711 words of instructions outside code blocks.
Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.
Safety
Auto-check passed
The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.
Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.
SKILL.md
The full file from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills at commit 932eb23, republished under its MIT licence (© brycewang-stanford). 711 words, ~1,575 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/atc-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- atc-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model, the round-one gate by two reviewers, the round-two read by 3-4 reviewers, double-blind reviewing, rebuttal, conditional acceptance with shepherding, and how ATC differs from OSDI/SOSP/NSDI.
ATC Review Process
Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. ATC's process is unusual among systems venues in 2026 because it runs in two rounds gated by a two-page extended abstract, and because acceptance is conditional on a shepherd. The most consequential mental shift for authors arriving from a single-round conference is that round one can end your submission before anyone reads the full paper — the extended abstract is not a formality.
Process model
- Submission and review run on HotCRP (
atc26.hotcrp.com) with double-blind anonymity: identities are mutually hidden through reviewing. - Round one: each two-page extended abstract is read by two experienced reviewers with a broad systems perspective; abstracts below the bar are rejected early. The extended abstract is review-only and not published.
- Round two: papers that advance are read in full by 3-4 reviewers, who weigh the significance and usefulness of the systems contribution, the soundness of the design, the honesty and completeness of the measurements, reproducibility, and clarity.
- Rebuttal / description of changes: authors get a short (about one page) window to correct factual misreadings and, where relevant, summarize revisions relative to a prior submission.
- Decision + shepherding: selected papers are conditionally accepted; final acceptance requires satisfying a shepherd (a PC member) on required revisions. Accepted papers publish in the ACM DL under Open Access.
Reading a decision against the model
| Outcome | What it means | Author move |
|---|---|---|
| Early reject (round one) | The abstract did not convey a problem, contribution, and result that clear the bar | Reframe the abstract; the paper may be fine but the pitch failed — see atc-writing-style |
| Full review, then reject | A design or evidence gap survived the full read | Fix the substance, not the framing; consider a sibling venue |
| Conditional accept | Contribution holds; specific revisions required | Treat the shepherd's list as binding; make or explicitly justify each item |
| Reject with encouragement | Structural but repairable over a cycle | Rebuild the evidence and resubmit next cycle or reroute |
The strategic reading: because round one judges the abstract, the highest-leverage editing on the whole paper is often the two pages a round-one reviewer sees. Write the submission so its problem and result are legible before the details.
Show full SKILL.md (354 more words)Show less
How ATC differs from its siblings
- vs. OSDI / SOSP: those flagships are more selective and lean toward larger, novel systems; ATC takes a broader, more practical slice and welcomes solid, useful, well-measured work a flagship might call incremental. A paper bounced from OSDI on "not novel enough" can be a strong ATC paper if the engineering and measurement are real. Neither shares ATC's two-round extended-abstract gate.
- vs. NSDI: NSDI centers networked systems and runs its own multi-deadline model; ATC's scope is all of systems and its 2026 calendar is a single June deadline. Route a networked-systems design there if the network is the contribution.
- vs. EuroSys: EuroSys is the other broad, SIGOPS-affiliated systems conference; the choice is often calendar and community pull. Under SIGOPS, ATC and EuroSys now sit in the same family, so check both deadlines.
- vs. pre-2026 USENIX ATC: the old ATC ran a single-round review on a winter deadline with USENIX-funded open access and no APC. The 2026 SIGOPS edition changed the round structure, the calendar, and the cost model at once — do not carry the old process forward.
Who reads you
Round one: two broad-perspective systems reviewers judging whether the idea and result are worth a full read. Round two: 3-4 reviewers closer to your subarea who open the artifact, check whether the measurements are end-to-end and honest about cost, and probe whether the baselines are fair. Vague design descriptions and average-only results get caught, not skimmed.
Where author leverage actually exists
[Before submission] topic tags -> reviewer pool; a self-standing abstract -> surviving round one
[Round-one gate] none after upload — the abstract is your only round-one argument
[Rebuttal] factual corrections, a missing number a reviewer asked for, misread-claim fixes
[Conditional accept] the shepherd round: make every required change or justify declining it, evidenced
[After reject] no appeal; reroute to a sibling systems venue or strengthen and resubmitA rebuttal moves borderline papers when it corrects a factual misreading or supplies a measurement a reviewer said was missing; it does not move papers by arguing taste. In the shepherd round, a silently skipped required change is what turns a conditional accept into trouble.
Misreadings to avoid
- Treating the extended abstract as boilerplate — it is the round-one decision surface.
- Treating conditional acceptance as unconditional — the shepherd can hold the paper until the required revisions land.
- Assuming OSDI-style novelty is required — ATC rewards solid, useful, measured systems work.
- Projecting the old USENIX ATC process — the round structure, calendar, and cost model changed in the SIGOPS transition.
Output format
[Process stage] pre-submission / round one / round two / rebuttal / conditional accept / final
[Decision driver] the criterion carrying the outcome (significance | soundness | evidence | clarity | reproducibility)
[Round-one readiness] does the extended abstract stand alone and clear the bar? yes/no
[Leverage plan] the next-stage action that can actually change the outcome
[Forbidden moves] identity leak / unsupported new claims / skipping a shepherd-required change© brycewang-stanford, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file
Files
Just SKILL.md in ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Atc Review Process next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.
| Skill | Stars | Used in | Tokens | Auto-check | Licence | Repo updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atc Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Deepseek Reasonruvnet/ruflo | 74k | — | ~626 | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Ejentum Reasoning Harnesssickn33/agentic-awesome-skills | 47k | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nowait Reasoning Optimizerdavila7/claude-code-templates | 33k | 2 repos | ~1.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Recall Reasoningparcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3 | 3.9k | 1 repos | ~758 | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nv Reason CxrNVIDIA/skills | 3.6k | — | ~3.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | Apache-2.0 |
Similar skills
Ejentum Reasoning Harness
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
MCP server exposing four cognitive harness modes (reasoning, code, anti-deception, memory).
Nowait Reasoning Optimizer
davila7/claude-code-templates
Implements the NOWAIT technique for efficient reasoning in R1-style LLMs.
Recall Reasoning
parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3
Search past reasoning for relevant decisions and approaches. An agent skill from parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3.
- Official
Nv Reason Cxr
NVIDIA/skills
Used for command-shape or live NV-Reason-CXR chest X-ray reasoning smoke tests.
Diagnostic Reasoning
kunchenguid/firstmate
Agent-only procedure for diagnosing reported bugs. An agent skill from kunchenguid/firstmate.
More from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
All 2,387 skills in this repoAaag Data Analysis
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running and reporting the analysis for an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial statistics and modeling, remote-sensing accuracy, or…
Aaag Literature Positioning
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when positioning an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript in the literature — engaging geographic scholarship across the relevant area and the…
Aaag Rebuttal
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when responding to an Annals of the American Association of Geographers decision letter (major/minor revision) — building a point-by-point response to the subject editor and…
Aaag Research Design
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when defending the research design of an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial/quantitative analysis and GIScience, remote-sensing and…
Aaag Review Process
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when you need to understand how the Annals of the American Association of Geographers evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymous review routed through a subject editor by…
Aaag Submission
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Annals of the American Association of Geographers via ScholarOne Manuscripts — area/article-type selection…
Questions about Atc Review Process
What does Atc Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model, the round-one…. Atc Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference, formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model, the round-one gate by two reviewers, the round-two read by 3-4 reviewers, double-blind reviewing, rebuttal, conditional acceptance with shepherding, and how ATC differs from OSDI/SOSP/NSDI.
When should I use Atc Review Process?
Atc Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how an ATC (ACM SIGOPS Annual Technical Conference; formerly USENIX ATC) submission is evaluated — the two-round extended-abstract model; the round-one gate by two reviewers; the round-two read by 3-4 reviewers.
How do I install Atc Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/atc-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Atc Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (ATC-Skills/skills/atc-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/atc-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Atc Review Process in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill atc-review-process -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/atc-review-process, .gemini/skills/atc-review-process, .github/skills/atc-review-process and .opencode/skills/atc-review-process in your project.
What does Atc Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Atc Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Atc Review Process access the network?
SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Atc Review Process safe to install?
Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.
What licence does Atc Review Process use?
Atc Review Process is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.
How many tokens does Atc Review Process use?
About 1.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.3k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.
What are the alternatives to Atc Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Atc Review Process: Deepseek Reason (ruvnet/ruflo, 74k stars), Ejentum Reasoning Harness (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars), Nowait Reasoning Optimizer (davila7/claude-code-templates, 33k stars) and Recall Reasoning (parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3, 3.9k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Atc Review Process?
brycewang-stanford (a GitHub user) maintains it in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, which has 1,231 GitHub stars. The repository holds 2,387 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 27, 2026.
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.