Hypothesis Generation
spacering-net/codeg
Structured hypothesis formulation from observations. An agent skill from spacering-net/codeg.
A skill your agent uses when managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission, where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections…
Install Focs Author Response
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill focs-author-response -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills focs-author-response --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/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response .claude/skills/focs-author-response && 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 "focs-author-response" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response into .claude/skills/focs-author-response/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "focs-author-response", 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/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-responseType 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 focs-author-response -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills focs-author-response --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/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response .agents/skills/focs-author-response && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "focs-author-response" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response into .agents/skills/focs-author-response/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "focs-author-response", 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 focs-author-response -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills focs-author-response --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/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response .cursor/skills/focs-author-response && 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 "focs-author-response" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response into .cursor/skills/focs-author-response/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "focs-author-response", 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 FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response--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 focs-author-response -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills focs-author-response --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/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response .gemini/skills/focs-author-response && 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 "focs-author-response" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response into .gemini/skills/focs-author-response/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "focs-author-response", 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 focs-author-responseInstalls 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 focs-author-response -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/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response .github/skills/focs-author-response && 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 "focs-author-response" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response into .github/skills/focs-author-response/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "focs-author-response", 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 focs-author-response -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 focs-author-response --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/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response .opencode/skills/focs-author-response && 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 "focs-author-response" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response into .opencode/skills/focs-author-response/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "focs-author-response", 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
focs-author-response- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 789 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission, where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections…
- Works in 3 steps: the pre-emptive rebuttal (before… → during review (April to notification) → after the decision
- Managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission
- SKILL.md covers Phase 1 — the pre-emptive…, Phase 2 — during review (April…, Phase 3 — after the decision and A memo entry, worked, plus 2 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Focs Author Response is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission, where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections inside the paper before submission, handling rare chair-mediated queries, and converting a rejection into a disciplined autumn resubmission.
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.
It sits in Research & Science. 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
- Managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission
- Where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections inside the paper before submission
- Handling rare chair-mediated queries
- Converting a rejection into a disciplined autumn resubmission
Example prompts
- “/focs-author-response”
Workflow steps
3 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.
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
Focs Author Response loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 85 tokens; SKILL.md has 789 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). 789 words, ~1,585 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/focs-author-response/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- focs-author-response
- description
- Use when managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission, where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections inside the paper before submission, handling rare chair-mediated queries, and converting a rejection into a disciplined autumn resubmission.
FOCS Author Response
The FOCS 2026 CFP schedules no rebuttal, no discussion phase, and no author-visible reviews before decisions (checked 2026-07-08; any informal PC-initiated clarification in a given cycle: 待核实). At a venue with no second turn, "author response" is a set of practices displaced in time: persuasion happens before the deadline, correction happens after the decision, and almost nothing happens in between. This skill covers all three phases.
Phase 1 — the pre-emptive rebuttal (before submission)
Write the objections you would rebut, then edit the paper until each is answered where it would arise. Build the table with a co-author playing antagonist:
| Anticipated objection | Where discharged | Device |
|---|---|---|
| "Isn't this implied by [强 result]?" | Intro, directly after the theorem | One paragraph: why the known result does not give yours (regime, model, quantifier order) |
| "The improvement is small" | Obstacle paragraph | Show the barrier the small step crosses (focs-writing-style) |
| "Lemma 5.3 looks fragile" | Overview §3 + full proof | Flag it yourself: "the delicate step is…", then prove it twice as carefully |
| "Why isn't this just [technique X]?" | Technical overview | A remark stating where X breaks on your instance |
| "Related to concurrent arXiv:2506.xxxxx?" | Related work | Independence paragraph written generously (focs-related-work) |
The discipline: every objection you can generate is answered in text a breadth reviewer will actually reach — inside the ten-page window, not in a page-40 remark. An objection answered only on page 40 is unanswered for the committee member who raises it in discussion.
Phase 2 — during review (April to notification)
The correct volume of author-initiated contact is near zero. Legitimate exceptions, all routed through the PC chair:
- You found a real bug. Report it promptly and factually: which lemma, what breaks, whether it is repaired. Chairs respect this; discovering the bug post-acceptance is far worse for everyone.
- A subsuming preprint appeared. A short factual note lets the PC judge with current information; silence gambles your credibility on the committee not checking arXiv.
- Procedural anomaly (e.g., you can prove a conflict was violated). State it once, without advocacy.
What is never legitimate: nudging, supplementary "clarification" emails, sending improved bounds (those belong in the next version), or contacting suspected reviewers. The venue's no-response design is deliberate; working around it reads as exactly what it is.
Phase 3 — after the decision
On acceptance, any reviewer comments arrive as gifts with no compliance
mechanism; triage them into camera-ready fixes anyway (focs-camera-ready)
— these are the field's most careful readers.
On rejection, run the resubmission protocol rather than the appeal instinct (there is no appeals process):
RESUBMISSION MEMO (internal; one page; write within a week of the decision)
1. Verbatim quotes of every substantive review point (no paraphrase —
paraphrase launders criticism into something easier to dismiss)
2. For each: ACCEPT (fix), REBUT (why wrong — with the proof/citation),
or REFRAME (misreading caused by our text; fix the text, not the reader)
3. Venue decision: STOC (autumn deadline, 2027 cycle: 待核实) / SODA / CCC /
ITCS / journal — re-run focs-topic-selection with the reviews as data
4. Diff plan: what changes before the next submission, owner and date eachTwo norms specific to the theory two-flagship rhythm: first, the receiving
STOC committee will overlap socially (though not formally) with the FOCS one,
so resubmitting an unchanged paper is a recognized and quietly penalized
move — visible improvement is the currency; second, update the arXiv version
before the next submission so the public record and the resubmission agree
(focs-reproducibility), with a changelog naming what strengthened.
Show full SKILL.md (309 more words)Show less
A memo entry, worked
The difference between triage and rationalization is visible in the writing. A REBUT entry that will survive your own re-reading in a month:
R2: "The reduction in Section 6 appears to require bounded degree." Class: REFRAME (partially REBUT). The reduction does not require it — Lemma 6.4's proof handles arbitrary degree — but the statement of Lemma 6.4 as written only asserts the bounded case, so the reviewer read correctly. Action: restate Lemma 6.4 in full generality (the proof already covers it), add one sentence in the overview flagging that degree is unrestricted. Owner/date: LW, before STOC submission.
Note what the entry does not do: it does not label the reviewer careless, and it locates the repair in the text rather than in the reader. Most "wrong" reviews at this level are correct readings of imprecise writing.
Deciding between the autumn options
The memo's venue line deserves its own analysis, because the reviews tell
you which committee to face next. Correctness complaints answered by real
fixes point back to the flagship track (STOC next, FOCS after). Significance
complaints from breadth readers, with depth readers positive, often mean the
paper is loved by specialists — SODA, CCC, or SoCG may simply be its
audience. Window complaints ("could not locate the proof of...") mean the
paper can return to the same tier after an exposition rebuild alone. And
uniformly thin reviews mean the decision carried no information: re-run
focs-topic-selection from scratch and trust your own audit over the noise.
Tone calibration for all phases
Any text that reaches a chair or a future committee: factual, short, zero adjectives about your own work, zero speculation about reviewers' competence or identity. The theory community is small and has a long memory; the response style you practice here is part of your research reputation in a way that outlasts any single paper's outcome.
© 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 FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Focs Author Response 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focs Author Response this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Hypothesis Generationspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 14 repos | ~3.6k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| GitHub Deep Researchbytedance/deer-flow | 84k | 4 repos | ~1.3k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nature Paper CardYuan1z0825/nature-skills | 47k | 2 repos | ~2.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Content Research Writerweapp-tailwindcss/weapp-tailwindcss | 1.9k | 25 repos | ~3.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Last30daysmvanhorn/last30days-skill | 64k | — | ~7.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
GitHub Deep Research
bytedance/deer-flow
Researches a GitHub repository over four rounds using the GitHub API and web search, then writes a structured markdown report with timeline, metrics and Mermaid diagrams.
Nature Paper Card
Yuan1z0825/nature-skills
Builds a structured deep-reading card for one scientific paper, covering methods, how experiments support claims, limitations and research ideas, with a script to prepare the source.
Content Research Writer
weapp-tailwindcss/weapp-tailwindcss
Assists in writing high-quality content by conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section.
Last30days
mvanhorn/last30days-skill
Research what people actually say about any topic in the last 30 days.
Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
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 Focs Author Response
What does Focs Author Response do?
A skill your agent uses when managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission, where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections…. Focs Author Response is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission, where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections inside the paper before submission, handling rare chair-mediated queries, and converting a rejection into a disciplined autumn resubmission.
When should I use Focs Author Response?
Focs Author Response fits situations like: managing author-side communication around a FOCS (IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science) submission; where no rebuttal round exists — discharging objections inside the paper before submission; handling rare chair-mediated queries; converting a rejection into a disciplined autumn resubmission.
How do I install Focs Author Response in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill focs-author-response -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/focs-author-response in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Focs Author Response in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill focs-author-response -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (FOCS-Skills/skills/focs-author-response in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/focs-author-response in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Focs Author Response 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 focs-author-response -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/focs-author-response, .gemini/skills/focs-author-response, .github/skills/focs-author-response and .opencode/skills/focs-author-response in your project.
What does Focs Author Response need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Focs Author Response is instructions for the agent only.
Does Focs Author Response 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 Focs Author Response 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 Focs Author Response use?
Focs Author Response 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 Focs Author Response 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 Focs Author Response?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Focs Author Response: Hypothesis Generation (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), GitHub Deep Research (bytedance/deer-flow, 84k stars), Nature Paper Card (Yuan1z0825/nature-skills, 47k stars) and Content Research Writer (weapp-tailwindcss/weapp-tailwindcss, 1.9k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Focs Author Response?
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.