DeepTutor CLI
HKUDS/DeepTutor
Teaches the agent to set up and run DeepTutor from the command line: chat and capabilities, knowledge bases, partners, memory, sessions, notebooks and the server or Web app.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline, reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy, rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance…
Install Corl Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill corl-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills corl-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/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process .claude/skills/corl-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 "corl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process into .claude/skills/corl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "corl-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/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-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 corl-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills corl-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/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process .agents/skills/corl-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 "corl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process into .agents/skills/corl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "corl-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 corl-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills corl-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/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process .cursor/skills/corl-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 "corl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process into .cursor/skills/corl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "corl-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 CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-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 corl-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills corl-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/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process .gemini/skills/corl-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 "corl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process into .gemini/skills/corl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "corl-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 corl-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 corl-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/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process .github/skills/corl-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 "corl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process into .github/skills/corl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "corl-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 corl-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 corl-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/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process .opencode/skills/corl-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 "corl-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process into .opencode/skills/corl-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "corl-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
corl-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.5k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 686 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 CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline, reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy, rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance…
- Works in 3 steps: A three-tier committee. Reviewers report… → A first-round rejection gate. In the… → Accepted papers publish their reviews.…
- Reasoning about how CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline
- SKILL.md covers The pipeline, stage by stage, Scoring culture, What CoRL reviewers probe first and Reading a review packet, plus 2 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Corl Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline, reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy, rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance threshold, the first-round rejection gate before rebuttal, the reviewer-AC discussion window, decision meetings, and public reviews for accepted papers.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.5k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
It sits in Education, covering Quizzes and assessments. 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 CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline
- Reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy
- Rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance threshold
- The first-round rejection gate before rebuttal
Example prompts
- “/corl-review-process”
Workflow steps
3 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- A three-tier committee. Reviewers report to Area Chairs, who report to
- A first-round rejection gate. In the 2026 process, a paper that receives no
- Accepted papers publish their reviews. Reviews and rebuttals of accepted
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
Links to these hosts (documentation or services it may open):
corl.org
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
Corl Review Process loads about 1.5k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 86 tokens; SKILL.md has 686 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). 686 words, ~1,504 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/corl-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- corl-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline, reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy, rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance threshold, the first-round rejection gate before rebuttal, the reviewer-AC discussion window, decision meetings, and public reviews for accepted papers.
CoRL Review Process
Model the pipeline correctly and author effort lands where it can still change the outcome. Everything here reflects the CoRL 2026 process as documented on corl.org (Instruction for Reviewers / Reviews / Rebuttal pages) and OpenReview, read 2026-07-08; CoRL adjusts its process year to year, so treat this as one cycle's mechanics.
The pipeline, stage by stage
| Stage | Who acts | Author leverage |
|---|---|---|
| Submission + abstract registration | Authors | Full — see corl-submission |
| Assignment (keywords, bidding, conflicts) | ACs, OpenReview matching | Indirect, via keyword choice |
| Reviewing (June–early Aug 2026) | 3-ish reviewers per paper + AC | None; do rebuttal prep instead |
| Reviews released + first-round gate | Program committee | None at the gate itself |
| One-page rebuttal (due Aug 11, 2026 AoE) | Authors | Highest-leverage moment |
| Reviewer–AC discussion (Aug 12–19, 2026) | Reviewers, ACs | Indirect, through the rebuttal |
| SAC–AC meetings, then SACs–PCs meeting | ACs, SACs, Program Chairs | None |
| Decision + (for accepted papers) public reviews | Program Chairs | None |
Three structural facts to internalize:
- A three-tier committee. Reviewers report to Area Chairs, who report to Senior Area Chairs; decisions are finalized in dedicated SAC–AC meetings plus a final SACs–PCs meeting. Your rebuttal's real audience includes the AC and SAC who will represent your paper in rooms you never see.
- A first-round rejection gate. In the 2026 process, a paper that receives no score of weak accept or above — from any reviewer or the AC — is a candidate for rejection without rebuttal. Initial impressions are therefore not provisional at CoRL; the paper must earn at least one advocate on first read.
- Accepted papers publish their reviews. Reviews and rebuttals of accepted papers are made publicly available. The exchange is part of the paper's permanent record, which disciplines both sides' tone.
Scoring culture
The 2026 reviewer instructions direct reviewers to score against a rubric rather than against their batch, with weak accept reported as the acceptance-threshold score in the review form's terms. Practical consequences for authors:
- A profile of one enthusiastic accept plus several borderlines is viable — the gate needs one weak-accept-or-above, and discussion can move borderlines.
- Reviewer confidence is reported separately and ACs are told to weigh it; a low-confidence negative review is explicitly contestable in the rebuttal, in factual and polite terms.
- Reviewers are told to keep weaknesses specific and constructive and to write reviews that can stand alone if the paper never reaches rebuttal — meaning the written text, not just the score, is what the AC audits at the gate.
Show full SKILL.md (285 more words)Show less
What CoRL reviewers probe first
The reviewer pool is the robot-learning community itself, and its recurring
checks are learning-specific (details in corl-experiments):
- Evaluation breadth: number of tasks, objects/scenes, seeds, and episodes per policy — single-configuration results draw immediate skepticism.
- Baseline recency: comparison against current robot-learning methods, not only classical controllers or two-generation-old learning baselines.
- Sim-vs-real honesty: whether claims scoped as "real-world" rest on real-robot evaluations, and whether the transfer gap is measured or hand-waved.
- The mandatory Limitations section: reviewers read it and cross-check that the failure modes it admits match what the video shows.
Reading a review packet
Triage grid — fill within 24h of reviews arriving:
R1 score: __ confidence: __ gate-relevant (>= weak accept)? __
R2 score: __ confidence: __ gate-relevant? __
R3 score: __ confidence: __ gate-relevant? __
AC (if scored/commented): __
If NO gate-relevant score exists:
-> paper is a first-round rejection candidate; expect no rebuttal round.
-> pivot to the resubmission branch (corl-topic-selection, corl-workflow).
If at least one exists:
-> rebuttal is live (corl-author-response); rank concerns by which
scores they block, not by which are easiest to answer.Confidentiality and process hygiene
- Reviewers must keep papers inside OpenReview and use them only for reviewing; suspected breaches go to the AC, not to public channels.
- Conflicts (institutional, advisor–advisee, recent collaboration, personal) are reassignment triggers — authors should declare them exhaustively on the form, as a missed conflict discovered late destabilizes an otherwise sound decision.
- Do not contact reviewers or guess identities; the discussion window is mediated entirely through OpenReview.
Calibrating expectations
- CoRL is small and selective by design (a few hundred papers per year in recent volumes, versus thousands at ML mega-conferences); per-paper acceptance rates for 2026 are 待核实 until the cycle closes — do not quote a number to a team.
- Between rebuttal close (Aug 11) and decisions (September 2026, exact date 待核实) there is genuine multi-layer deliberation; silence in that window carries no signal either way.
- Reviewer quality varies with pool load in a fast-growing field; the appeal path for a factually broken review is a calm note to the AC via OpenReview during the discussion window, not after decisions.
Re-verify the live process pages before advising on any cycle: https://www.corl.org/contributions/instruction-for-reviewers and https://www.corl.org/contributions/instruction-for-reviewers (2026 URLs; year-sites rotate).
© 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 CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Corl 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corl Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| DeepTutor CLIHKUDS/DeepTutor | 41k | — | ~2.8k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| AI Engineering Placement Quizrohitg00/ai-engineering-from-scratch | 66k | — | ~2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Codebase to Coursezarazhangrui/codebase-to-course | 5.7k | — | ~4.4k | Automated safety check: Pass | None | |
| AI Engineering Phase Quizrohitg00/ai-engineering-from-scratch | 66k | — | ~2.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Scholar EvaluationK-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer | 2.4k | 2 repos | ~2.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
AI Engineering Placement Quiz
rohitg00/ai-engineering-from-scratch
Runs a 10-question quiz across five areas to place a learner in the AI Engineering from Scratch curriculum, so they skip what they already know.
Codebase to Course
zarazhangrui/codebase-to-course
Turns a codebase into an interactive single-page HTML course for non-technical learners, with scroll modules, animated diagrams, quizzes and plain-English code translations.
AI Engineering Phase Quiz
rohitg00/ai-engineering-from-scratch
Quizzes you on a completed phase of the AI Engineering from Scratch course, taking a phase number or name and mapping it to that phase's directory.
Scholar Evaluation
K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer
Provide qualitative-first, evidence-traceable developmental review of scholarly works and audit low-stakes research-assessment rubrics with optional local quality controls.
Evaluation
guanyang/open-agent-hub
This skill should be used when building agent evaluation systems: deterministic checks, regression suites, multi-dimensional rubrics, quality gates, production monitoring, baseline comparison, and…
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…
Related
Categories
Questions about Corl Review Process
What does Corl Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline, reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy, rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance…. Corl Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline, reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy, rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance threshold, the first-round rejection gate before rebuttal, the reviewer-AC discussion window, decision meetings, and public reviews for accepted papers.
When should I use Corl Review Process?
Corl Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how CoRL reviews a paper — the OpenReview double-anonymous pipeline; reviewer/AC/SAC hierarchy; rubric scoring with weak accept as the acceptance threshold; the first-round rejection gate before rebuttal.
How do I install Corl Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill corl-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/corl-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Corl Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill corl-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (CoRL-Skills/skills/corl-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/corl-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Corl 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 corl-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/corl-review-process, .gemini/skills/corl-review-process, .github/skills/corl-review-process and .opencode/skills/corl-review-process in your project.
What does Corl Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Corl Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Corl Review Process access the network?
SKILL.md names 1 domain. As links in the text: corl.org. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.
Is Corl 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 Corl Review Process use?
Corl 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 Corl Review Process use?
About 1.5k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6k 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 Corl Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Corl Review Process: DeepTutor CLI (HKUDS/DeepTutor, 41k stars), AI Engineering Placement Quiz (rohitg00/ai-engineering-from-scratch, 66k stars), Codebase to Course (zarazhangrui/codebase-to-course, 5.7k stars) and AI Engineering Phase Quiz (rohitg00/ai-engineering-from-scratch, 66k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Corl 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.