New: 98,000+ skills indexed from GitHub repos with 100+ stars · every skill safety-checkedBrowse top skillsTop skills
Esc to closeBrowse all skills
Submit a skillBrowse skills
Submit a skillBrowse skills

Agent skill

Commres Review Process

by brycewang-stanford in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

A skill your agent uses to understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review, editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit, external review, and the…

MITAuto-check passed

Install Commres Review Process

skills CLI
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill commres-review-process -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills commres-review-process --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/Communication-Research-Skills/skills/commres-review-process .claude/skills/commres-review-process && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.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/

Facts

Skill name
commres-review-process
GitHub stars
1.2k
Token cost
~1.6k tokens
SKILL.md length
702 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
2,387
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

A skill your agent uses to understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review, editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit, external review, and the…

  • Works in 5 steps: Double-anonymized. Reviewers do not know… → Editorial screening first. Manuscripts… → External review. Manuscripts that pass… → …
  • Understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review
  • SKILL.md covers When to trigger, How CR review works, Open practices in review and Shape the paper to pass, plus 6 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Commres Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use to understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review, editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit, external review, and the requirement that two independent positive reviews back a Revise or Accept decision. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.

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

  • Understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review
  • Editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit
  • External review
  • The requirement that two independent positive reviews back a Revise

Example prompts

  • “/commres-review-process”

Workflow steps

5 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.

  1. Double-anonymized. Reviewers do not know the authors and authors do not know reviewers.
  2. Editorial screening first. Manuscripts that are off-scope (qualitative/interpretive for a
  3. External review. Manuscripts that pass go to expert referees under the double-anonymized model.
  4. Two independent reviews to advance. CR requires two independent reviews to back a **Revise
  5. Decision categories: typically reject, revise and resubmit (major or minor), or

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

Commres Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 92 tokens; SKILL.md has 702 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~92
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~1.6k

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). 702 words, ~1,592 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/commres-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
commres-review-process
description
Use to understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review, editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit, external review, and the requirement that two independent positive reviews back a Revise or Accept decision. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.

Review Process (commres-review-process)

Knowing how CR screens and decides lets you pre-empt the failure modes before submitting. CR is double-anonymized and is a quantitative, theory-testing journal, so it screens for both fit and methodological rigor.

When to trigger

  • Before submitting, to stress-test fit, rigor, and anonymization
  • Deciding whether the contribution is quantitative and theory-testing enough for CR
  • Interpreting a decision letter and setting expectations
  • Understanding what reviewers are instructed to weigh

How CR review works

  1. Double-anonymized. Reviewers do not know the authors and authors do not know reviewers. Anonymize the main document and supplemental materials; write self-citations in the third person (see commres-submission).
  2. Editorial screening first. Manuscripts that are off-scope (qualitative/interpretive for a quantitative venue), descriptive, atheoretical, or methodologically weak may be declined without full review. CR screens for a tested communication mechanism, not a platform description.
  3. External review. Manuscripts that pass go to expert referees under the double-anonymized model.
  4. Two independent reviews to advance. CR requires two independent reviews to back a Revise or Accept decision (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准) — a single enthusiastic reviewer is not enough, so the paper must satisfy more than one expert at once.
  5. Decision categories: typically reject, revise and resubmit (major or minor), or accept — the final call is the editor's, weighing the reviews.

Open practices in review

  • A data-availability statement is expected; preregistration (if any) should be noted in the cover letter; open-materials/data claims must be deposited to be credited (see commres-transparency-and-data).

Shape the paper to pass

  • Make the tested mechanism explicit (avoids the "descriptive / atheoretical" screen-out).
  • Defend measurement validity and identification up front — CR reviewers probe both.
  • Engage the relevant empirical literatures, including across communication areas.
  • Clear ethics/IRB and human-subjects compliance.
  • Write to two expert reviewers at once: anticipate the strongest objection of each and answer it in the design.

Two gates, two failure modes (calibration anchor, hedged)

GateWho decidesWhat kills a paper herePre-empt by
Editorial fit/rigor screenhandling editor / EICqualitative for the venue, descriptive, atheoretical, weak measurementfront-loading a tested mechanism + valid measures
External expert reviewindependent referees (≥2 to advance)weak theory advance, shaky measurement, no mechanism, CMV/confoundanswering each referee's strongest objection in the design

The fit screen is fast; external review is slow and substantive. Referee count, decision wording, and timeline are volatile — confirm against the journal's current submission guidelines (待核实).

Show full SKILL.md (312 more words)Show less

Worked micro-example: reading a "major revisions" signal (illustrative)

A "major revisions" letter says "the framing effect is plausible but the mediation is not convincing." This is an external-review objection (the tested mechanism), not a fit screen-out — the editor already judged the topic and design CR-relevant. The path is a sharper mediation test (manipulate or better-measure the mediator; report bootstrap CIs), not more covariates. Reading it as a call for controls is the classic misread that loses a winnable R&R — and because CR needs two reviewers on side, you must convince the skeptical second reviewer, not only the encouraging first.

Anti-patterns

  • Submitting a qualitative or descriptive paper to a quantitative venue (fit screen-out)
  • Ignoring measurement-validity or common-method-variance concerns reviewers will raise
  • Expecting acceptance without revision — most accepted papers go through at least one R&R
  • Satisfying one reviewer while ignoring the second (CR needs two on side to advance)
  • Leaving identifiers in supplemental materials (breaks double-anonymization)

Review-risk pass for Communication Research

Treat this skill as an executable review pass, not a prose hint. First lock the communication process, the measured constructs, the study design, and the inferential claim; then judge whether the manuscript answers CR's real reader: a quantitatively trained communication scientist who weighs theory, measurement validity, identification, and effect interpretation.

  • Do the pass: Turn probable reviewer objections into a ledger with response evidence, manuscript location, and which of the two reviewers each must convince.
  • Return a ledger: give claim / evidence / risk / manuscript location rows so the next agent edits rather than rediscovers the issue.
  • Sibling guard: Journal of Communication (all-paradigm), Human Communication Research (interpersonal), New Media & Society (digital). If a sibling owns the contribution, re-route before polishing format.
  • Stop condition: do not give submission-ready advice until resources/official-source-map.md has been checked and the manuscript has one concrete fix for the largest venue-specific risk.

Output format

【Fit check】quantitative, theory-testing? any red flags?
【Mechanism】tested mechanism explicit enough to clear the screen? [Y/N]
【Measurement】validity + CMV defended? [Y/N]
【Anonymization】main doc + supplements clean? [Y/N]
【Two-reviewer test】would two independent experts back R&R? [Y/N]
【Realistic outcome】reject / R&R (major/minor) / (rare) accept
【Next】commres-submission (or commres-rebuttal if decided)

Supplementary resources

© 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 Communication-Research-Skills/skills/commres-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23

Compare with similar skills

Commres 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.

Commres Review Process compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Commres Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1.2k—~1.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Arize Evaluatorgithub/awesome-copilot40k1 repos~8.1kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT
LLM Evaluationdavila7/claude-code-templates33k12 repos~3.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Agent Evaluationsickn33/agentic-awesome-skills47k1 repos~2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
EvaluatorsArize-ai/phoenix12k—~1.7kAutomated safety check: PassCustom licence
Agent Evaluation Reportingsickn33/agentic-awesome-skills47k1 repos~2.1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Arize Evaluator

    github/awesome-copilot

    Official

    Handles LLM-as-judge evaluation workflows on Arize including creating/updating evaluators, running evaluations on spans or experiments, managing tasks, trigger-run operations, column mapping, and…

    40k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~8.1k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check: notes

  • LLM Evaluation

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

    33k GitHub starsUsed in 12 repos~3.5k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed

  • Agent Evaluation

    sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

    Evaluate agent behavior with versioned cases and explicit verifiers.

    47k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2k tokens
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed

  • Evaluators

    Arize-ai/phoenix

    Author or refine a Phoenix evaluator — code or LLM-as-a-judge — that scores a run's output.

    12k GitHub stars~1.7k tokensUpdated today
    EducationAuto-check passed

  • Agent Evaluation Reporting

    sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

    A skill your agent uses when summarizing agent evaluations where autonomous, assisted, failed, timed-out, or invalid outcomes must remain distinct and comparable.

    47k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2.1k tokens
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed

  • How To Communicate

    databasus/databasus

    Communicate clearly in every response, progress update and agent-authored document.

    8.8k GitHub stars~3.9k tokensUpdated 18 days ago
    DatabasesAuto-check passed

More from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

All 2,387 skills in this repo

  • Aaag 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…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 13 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • 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…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 13 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • 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…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 13 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • 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…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 13 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • 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…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 13 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • 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…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.6k tokensUpdated 13 days ago
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Commres Review Process

What does Commres Review Process do?

A skill your agent uses to understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review, editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit, external review, and the…. Commres Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use to understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review, editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit, external review, and the requirement that two independent positive reviews back a Revise or Accept decision.

When should I use Commres Review Process?

Commres Review Process fits situations like: understand how Communication Research (CR) evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymized review; editorial screening for quantitative/theory fit; external review; the requirement that two independent positive reviews back a Revise.

How do I install Commres Review Process in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill commres-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (Communication-Research-Skills/skills/commres-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/commres-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Commres Review Process in Codex?

Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill commres-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (Communication-Research-Skills/skills/commres-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/commres-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Commres 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 commres-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/commres-review-process, .gemini/skills/commres-review-process, .github/skills/commres-review-process and .opencode/skills/commres-review-process in your project.

What does Commres Review Process need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Commres Review Process is instructions for the agent only.

Does Commres 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 Commres 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 Commres Review Process use?

Commres 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 Commres Review Process use?

About 1.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.4k 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 Commres Review Process?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Commres Review Process: Arize Evaluator (github/awesome-copilot, 40k stars), LLM Evaluation (davila7/claude-code-templates, 33k stars), Agent Evaluation (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars) and Evaluators (Arize-ai/phoenix, 12k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Commres 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.