Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
A skill your agent uses when anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening, anonymous peer review, decision categories, and how reviewers judge…
Install Cps Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill cps-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills cps-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/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process .claude/skills/cps-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 "cps-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process into .claude/skills/cps-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "cps-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/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-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 cps-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills cps-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/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process .agents/skills/cps-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 "cps-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process into .agents/skills/cps-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "cps-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 cps-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills cps-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/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process .cursor/skills/cps-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 "cps-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process into .cursor/skills/cps-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "cps-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 Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-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 cps-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills cps-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/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process .gemini/skills/cps-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 "cps-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process into .gemini/skills/cps-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "cps-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 cps-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 cps-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/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process .github/skills/cps-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 "cps-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process into .github/skills/cps-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "cps-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 cps-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 cps-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/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process .opencode/skills/cps-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 "cps-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process into .opencode/skills/cps-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "cps-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
cps-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.2k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 476 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening, anonymous peer review, decision categories, and how reviewers judge…
- Works in 2 steps: Editorial / desk screen. An editor… → Anonymous peer review. Reviewers…
- Anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening
- SKILL.md covers When to trigger, The two screens, What CPS reviewers reward and… and Decision categories (verify…, plus 5 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Cps Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening, anonymous peer review, decision categories, and how reviewers judge comparative work. Calibrates expectations; it does not write the submission or the rebuttal.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.2k 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 Research & Science, covering Peer review. 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
- Anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening
- Anonymous peer review
- Decision categories
- How reviewers judge comparative work
Example prompts
- “/cps-review-process”
Workflow steps
2 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- Editorial / desk screen. An editor judges fit and quality before review. Common desk-reject
- Anonymous peer review. Reviewers (typically comparativists matched to subfield and method)
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
Cps Review Process loads about 1.2k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 73 tokens; SKILL.md has 476 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). 476 words, ~1,170 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/cps-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- cps-review-process
- description
- Use when anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening, anonymous peer review, decision categories, and how reviewers judge comparative work. Calibrates expectations; it does not write the submission or the rebuttal.
Review Process (cps-review-process)
Knowing how CPS evaluates a paper lets you preempt the objections before submitting. CPS uses anonymous peer review via SAGE Track (ScholarOne); the manuscript is screened by an editor first, then sent to reviewers if it clears desk evaluation. Comparativists review for comparative leverage, travel, and methodological soundness on the paper's own terms.
When to trigger
- Before submission, to stress-test the paper against likely reviewer objections
- Deciding whether the paper is ready or needs another design/analysis loop
- Interpreting a decision letter and what each decision category means
- Anticipating reviewer disagreement across subfields/methods
The two screens
- Editorial / desk screen. An editor judges fit and quality before review. Common desk-reject grounds: not comparative / no comparative leverage; out of CPS scope; better suited to a general or IR journal; insufficient contribution; serious methodological or ethical problems; not ready in English/format. Make the comparative contribution unmissable on page one to clear this screen.
- Anonymous peer review. Reviewers (typically comparativists matched to subfield and method) evaluate the contribution, design, and execution. Editors weigh reviews and decide.
What CPS reviewers reward and punish
| Reviewers reward | Reviewers punish |
|---|---|
| Clear comparative leverage and a portable mechanism | Single-case study with no comparative claim |
| Design that rules out the leading rival | "Causal" language on a cross-national correlation |
| Cross-national measurement handled transparently | Cherry-picked codings; few-cluster SEs ignored |
| Engagement with the comparative literature beyond one region | Regional insularity; reinventing a known result |
| Replication-ready materials and a data availability statement | Opaque, un-reproducible analysis |
Decision categories (verify current wording)
- Reject (incl. desk reject) — fit, contribution, or execution falls short.
- Revise & resubmit (R&R) — the path most accepted papers take; address reviewers and editor
systematically (hand off to
cps-rebuttal). - Conditional acceptance / acceptance — for quantitative papers, final acceptance is gated on the
CPS Dataverse deposit (see
cps-transparency-and-data).
Exact decision labels, timelines, desk-reject rates, and number of reviewers are not fixed public figures — confirm on the SAGE author page; treat the above as the working model (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准).
Show full SKILL.md (151 more words)Show less
Pre-submission stress test
- Write the single strongest reviewer objection to your comparative claim and answer it in one
paragraph + one exhibit. If you cannot, loop back to
cps-research-designorcps-data-analysis. - Check the paper against the comparative-fit checks in
cps-workflowbefore you submit.
Checklist
- Comparative contribution is unmissable on page one (clears desk screen)
- Paper fits CPS scope, not APSR/AJPS/WP/IO/BJPS
- The leading rival is adjudicated, not asserted away
- Cross-national measurement and inference are defensible
- Replication materials + data availability statement are ready
- Strongest anticipated objection has a one-paragraph + one-exhibit answer
Anti-patterns
- Submitting before the comparative leverage is unmistakable (desk-reject risk)
- Ignoring that quant final acceptance is gated on the Dataverse deposit
- Assuming reviewers share your regional expertise — write for a cross-regional comparativist
- Treating R&R as acceptance — it is a contract to answer every point
Output format
【Desk-screen risk】comparative contribution clear on page one? [Y/N]
【Strongest objection】+ the one-paragraph + one-exhibit answer
【Inference/measurement】defensible for a comparative reviewer? [Y/N]
【Transparency ready】Dataverse package + data availability statement? [Y/N]
【Decision expected】reject / R&R / (conditional) accept
【Next】cps-submission (if ready) or back to design/analysisSupplementary resources
../../resources/official-source-map.md— CPS review model and portal../../resources/exemplars/library.md— what cleared review at CPS, by subfield × method
© 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 Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Cps 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cps Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Peer Reviewspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 17 repos | ~5.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Scholar Evaluationspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 11 repos | ~3.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Academic Paper Writing PipelineImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~16k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Academic Paper ReviewerImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~11k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Peer ReviewK-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer | 2.4k | 2 repos | ~3.1k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
Scholar Evaluation
spacering-net/codeg
Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and…
Academic Paper Writing Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Runs a 12-agent pipeline that plans, drafts, cites, reviews and formats academic papers, with modes for revision, rebuttals, abstracts and citation checks.
Academic Paper Reviewer
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Simulates a journal peer review of a manuscript with a five-seat reviewer panel, an editorial synthesizer and several review modes.
Peer Review
K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer
Prepare evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments.
Academic Research Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Orchestrates a ten-stage academic workflow from research to finished manuscript, including integrity checks, two rounds of peer review and revision.
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 Cps Review Process
What does Cps Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening, anonymous peer review, decision categories, and how reviewers judge…. Cps Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening, anonymous peer review, decision categories, and how reviewers judge comparative work.
When should I use Cps Review Process?
Cps Review Process fits situations like: anticipating how a Comparative Political Studies (CPS) manuscript will be evaluated — desk screening; anonymous peer review; decision categories; how reviewers judge comparative work.
How do I install Cps Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill cps-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/cps-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Cps Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill cps-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (Comparative-Political-Studies-Skills/skills/cps-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/cps-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Cps 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 cps-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/cps-review-process, .gemini/skills/cps-review-process, .github/skills/cps-review-process and .opencode/skills/cps-review-process in your project.
What does Cps Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Cps Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Cps 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 Cps 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 Cps Review Process use?
Cps 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 Cps Review Process use?
About 1.2k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 4.7k 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 Cps Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Cps Review Process: Peer Review (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Scholar Evaluation (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Academic Paper Writing Pipeline (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars) and Academic Paper Reviewer (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Cps 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.