Deepseek Reason
ruvnet/ruflo
Reasoning-mode completion against DeepSeek's deepseek-reasoner model (R1) via /v1/chat/completions.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous "heavy" review, the at-least-three-reviewer PC model, the Accept / Major…
MITAuto-check passed
Install Fse Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill fse-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills fse-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/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process .claude/skills/fse-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 "fse-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process into .claude/skills/fse-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "fse-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/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-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 fse-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills fse-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/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process .agents/skills/fse-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 "fse-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process into .agents/skills/fse-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "fse-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 fse-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills fse-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/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process .cursor/skills/fse-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 "fse-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process into .cursor/skills/fse-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "fse-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 FSE-Skills/skills/fse-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 fse-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills fse-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/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process .gemini/skills/fse-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 "fse-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process into .gemini/skills/fse-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "fse-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 fse-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 fse-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/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process .github/skills/fse-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 "fse-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process into .github/skills/fse-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "fse-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 fse-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 fse-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/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process .opencode/skills/fse-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 "fse-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process into .opencode/skills/fse-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "fse-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
fse-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.5k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 705 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous "heavy" review, the at-least-three-reviewer PC model, the Accept / Major…
- Reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated
- SKILL.md covers Process model, Reading a decision against the…, How FSE differs from its… and Who reads you, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Covering double-anonymous heavy review
What it does
Fse Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous "heavy" review, the at-least-three-reviewer PC model, the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision categories, the journal-style revise-and-resubmit round of PACMSE, and how FSE's process differs from ICSE's cycles and ISSTA's rounds.
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.
The repository describes itself as: Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的… The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated
- Covering double-anonymous heavy review
- The at-least-three-reviewer PC model
- The Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision categories
Example prompts
- “s process differs from ICSE”
- “/fse-review-process”
What it can do on your machine
Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 932eb23. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.
Tool permissions
Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.
From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.
Runs code
No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.
From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.
Network
No URLs in SKILL.md.
From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.
Credentials
Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.
From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.
Context cost
Fse Review Process loads about 1.5k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 89 tokens; SKILL.md has 705 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). 705 words, ~1,519 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/fse-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- fse-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous "heavy" review, the at-least-three-reviewer PC model, the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision categories, the journal-style revise-and-resubmit round of PACMSE, and how FSE's process differs from ICSE's cycles and ISSTA's rounds.
FSE Review Process
Model the pipeline before interpreting any single review. FSE's process is journal-style: papers are PACMSE articles, and Major Revision is a first-class decision, not a soft rejection. The most consequential mental shift for authors arriving from a plain accept/reject conference is that a Major Revision is a genuine revise-and-resubmit round with the same reviewers, closer to a journal R&R than to a rebuttal.
Process model
- Submission and review run on HotCRP with heavy double-anonymity: identities are hidden through all reviewing and discussion, and any Major Revision response must itself be anonymous.
- Each paper is read by at least three program-committee members (FSE 2027 call), who weigh the significance of the SE contribution, soundness of the method, quality and honesty of the empirical evidence, threats-to-validity reasoning, clarity, and open-science support.
- First decisions fall into Accept, Major Revision, or Reject. A Major Revision is re-reviewed — generally by the original reviewers — against the revision and its response letter.
- Accepted papers publish in PACMSE, so final metadata, camera-ready compliance, and artifact follow-through matter as much as the initial verdict.
Reading a decision against the categories
| Decision | What it means | Author move |
|---|---|---|
| Accept | Contribution and evidence hold; minor polish only | Camera-ready + artifact; do not reopen scope |
| Major Revision | Repairable gaps: missing analysis, unclear construct, a needed baseline | Treat as an R&R: make or explicitly decline every request, evidenced |
| Reject | Structural: wrong population, no credible baseline, thin contribution | Reframe or reroute (ICSE/ASE/ISSTA or a journal), do not lightly resubmit unchanged |
The strategic reading: write the initial submission so that whatever is weakest is revisable in a revision round (an analysis you can add, a threat you can bound) rather than structural (a study design you cannot redo in weeks). The process is built to reward repairable papers.
How FSE differs from its siblings
- vs. ICSE: ICSE has run its own cycle structure (a two-cycle model in some years, single in others) with an Accept/Major-Revision/Reject flavor too, but on the IEEE side. FSE's identity is the PACMSE journal framing and the SIGSOFT open-science defaults. Never assume the two share a calendar or template.
- vs. ISSTA: ISSTA has used multi-round reviewing within a cycle; FSE's revise-and-resubmit is a decision-driven round (you revise because you were told to), not a scheduled second read of every paper.
- vs. the FSE 2024 dual-deadline year: FSE once let a Major Revision resubmit to a later deadline within the same review year. Recent calls advertise a single annual deadline with the revision round inside it — confirm the current cadence rather than carrying either forward.
Show full SKILL.md (281 more words)Show less
Who reads you
Expect three SE-empiricist reviewers. They look for the threats-to-validity section, check whether claims outrun evidence, ask whether subjects and baselines are real and fair, and often open the artifact. Because FSE spans techniques, empirical studies, and human factors, a paper is usually matched to reviewers from its own subarea — vague method descriptions get caught, not skimmed.
Where author leverage actually exists
[Before submission] topic tags -> reviewer pool (largest lever)
[Initial reviews] factual corrections, targeted evidence, clarifying misreadings
[Major Revision] the strongest lever: a tracked-change revision + point-by-point,
anonymous response letter re-read by the same reviewers
[After reject] no appeal; reroute to a sibling flagship or an SE journalA response moves borderline papers when it corrects a factual misreading or supplies a number a reviewer said was missing; it does not move papers when it argues taste. In a Major Revision, silent omissions — a requested change neither made nor explicitly declined with a reason — are what turn the second read into a rejection.
Reading a review packet
Weight reviews before answering. A review that cites your section numbers, tables, and threats was read closely and will be read closely again in the revision round — its author is your likely advocate if the response holds. A review that discusses only novelty has left soundness and verifiability to the others; answer each reviewer on the axis they raised. Reviewers often end with an explicit question list; the revision is scored heavily on whether each question got a direct, evidenced answer.
Misreadings to avoid
- Treating Major Revision as a guaranteed accept — the second read is real; budget the revision window like a deadline.
- Treating the response as a debate — the PC discussion decides; your text is evidence for an advocate, not a closing argument.
- Assuming unanimity is required — a champion with answers to the other reviews can carry a paper through the discussion.
- Projecting last year's cadence — deadline count and revision timing are decided per edition.
Output format
[Process stage] pre-submission / awaiting reviews / major revision / final / accepted
[Decision category] accept / major revision / reject, with the criterion driving it
[Criterion map] each review point -> significance | soundness | evidence | threats | clarity | open-science
[Leverage plan] the next-stage action that can actually change the outcome
[Forbidden moves] identity leak (incl. in the response letter) / unsupported new claims© 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 FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Fse 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fse Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.5k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Deepseek Reasonruvnet/ruflo | 74k | — | ~626 | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Ejentum Reasoning Harnesssickn33/agentic-awesome-skills | 47k | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nowait Reasoning Optimizerdavila7/claude-code-templates | 32k | 2 repos | ~1.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Recall Reasoningparcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3 | 3.9k | 1 repos | ~758 | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Nv Reason CxrNVIDIA/skills | 3.5k | — | ~3.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | Apache-2.0 |
Similar skills
Ejentum Reasoning Harness
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
MCP server exposing four cognitive harness modes (reasoning, code, anti-deception, memory).
Nowait Reasoning Optimizer
davila7/claude-code-templates
Implements the NOWAIT technique for efficient reasoning in R1-style LLMs.
Recall Reasoning
parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3
Search past reasoning for relevant decisions and approaches. An agent skill from parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3.
- Official
Nv Reason Cxr
NVIDIA/skills
Used for command-shape or live NV-Reason-CXR chest X-ray reasoning smoke tests.
Diagnostic Reasoning
kunchenguid/firstmate
Agent-only procedure for diagnosing reported bugs. An agent skill from kunchenguid/firstmate.
More from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
All 2,387 skills in this repoAaag Data Analysis
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running and reporting the analysis for an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial statistics and modeling, remote-sensing accuracy, or…
Aaag Literature Positioning
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when positioning an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript in the literature — engaging geographic scholarship across the relevant area and the…
Aaag Rebuttal
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when responding to an Annals of the American Association of Geographers decision letter (major/minor revision) — building a point-by-point response to the subject editor and…
Aaag Research Design
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when defending the research design of an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial/quantitative analysis and GIScience, remote-sensing and…
Aaag Review Process
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when you need to understand how the Annals of the American Association of Geographers evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymous review routed through a subject editor by…
Aaag Submission
brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
A skill your agent uses when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Annals of the American Association of Geographers via ScholarOne Manuscripts — area/article-type selection…
Questions about Fse Review Process
What does Fse Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous "heavy" review, the at-least-three-reviewer PC model, the Accept / Major…. Fse Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated, covering double-anonymous "heavy" review, the at-least-three-reviewer PC model, the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision categories, the journal-style revise-and-resubmit round of PACMSE, and how FSE's process differs from ICSE's cycles and ISSTA's rounds.
When should I use Fse Review Process?
Fse Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how an ESEC/FSE research submission is evaluated; covering double-anonymous heavy review; the at-least-three-reviewer PC model; the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision categories.
How do I install Fse Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill fse-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/fse-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Fse Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill fse-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (FSE-Skills/skills/fse-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/fse-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Fse 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 fse-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/fse-review-process, .gemini/skills/fse-review-process, .github/skills/fse-review-process and .opencode/skills/fse-review-process in your project.
What does Fse Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Fse Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Fse 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 Fse 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 Fse Review Process use?
Fse 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 Fse Review Process use?
About 1.5k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.1k 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 Fse Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Fse Review Process: Deepseek Reason (ruvnet/ruflo, 74k stars), Ejentum Reasoning Harness (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars), Nowait Reasoning Optimizer (davila7/claude-code-templates, 32k stars) and Recall Reasoning (parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3, 3.9k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Fse Review Process?
brycewang-stanford (a GitHub user) maintains it in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, which has 1,228 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.