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

Agent skill

Icra Author Response

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

A skill your agent uses when responding to ICRA reviews in the channels that actually exist — turning decision-day reviewer comments into a disciplined camera-ready revision, writing the…

MITAuto-check passedResearch & Science

Install Icra Author Response

skills CLI
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icra-author-response -a claude-code

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

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills icra-author-response --agent claude-code

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

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/ICRA-Skills/skills/icra-author-response .claude/skills/icra-author-response && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
icra-author-response
GitHub stars
1.2k
Token cost
~1.6k tokens
SKILL.md length
658 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
2,387
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

A skill your agent uses when responding to ICRA reviews in the channels that actually exist — turning decision-day reviewer comments into a disciplined camera-ready revision, writing the…

  • Works in 5 steps: Extract every substantive objection;… → Classify: evidence gap / clarity failure… → For each, decide: fix with new data, fix… → …
  • Writing the revise-and-resubmit response letter on the RA-L pathway
  • SKILL.md covers Channel 1: the camera-ready…, Channel 2: the RA-L response…, Channel 3: the resubmission… and Tone calibration (robotics…, plus 3 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Icra Author Response is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when responding to ICRA reviews in the channels that actually exist — turning decision-day reviewer comments into a disciplined camera-ready revision, writing the revise-and-resubmit response letter on the RA-L pathway, or converting an ICRA reject into a targeted IROS or RA-L resubmission — since classic ICRA offers no rebuttal.

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

  • Writing the revise-and-resubmit response letter on the RA-L pathway
  • Converting an ICRA reject into a targeted IROS
  • RA-L resubmission — since classic ICRA offers no rebuttal

Example prompts

  • “/icra-author-response”

Workflow steps

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

  1. Extract every substantive objection; deduplicate across reviewers.
  2. Classify: evidence gap / clarity failure / novelty challenge / scope
  3. For each, decide: fix with new data, fix with rewriting, or consciously
  4. Diff the venue: what IROS or RA-L reviewers will additionally expect (RA-L
  5. Reviewer-pool overlap is high across ICRA/IROS/RA-L — assume at least one

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

Icra Author Response loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 89 tokens; SKILL.md has 658 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~89
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~1.6k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills at commit 932eb23, republished under its MIT licence (© brycewang-stanford). 658 words, ~1,567 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/icra-author-response/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
icra-author-response
description
Use when responding to ICRA reviews in the channels that actually exist — turning decision-day reviewer comments into a disciplined camera-ready revision, writing the revise-and-resubmit response letter on the RA-L pathway, or converting an ICRA reject into a targeted IROS or RA-L resubmission — since classic ICRA offers no rebuttal.

ICRA Author Response

At most conferences "author response" means a rebuttal window. Classic ICRA has none (verify the current cycle — see icra-review-process): reviews arrive together with the January decision. Author response at ICRA therefore happens in three real channels, each with its own craft: the camera-ready revision after acceptance, the RA-L response letter if the work travels the journal pathway, and the resubmission memo after a reject. Doing these well is a skill; pretending a rebuttal exists is a planning error.

Channel 1: the camera-ready revision (accepted papers)

Reviewer comments on an accepted ICRA paper are advisory — no one re-checks compliance — but ignoring them is shortsighted: reviewers are your first readers, their confusions predict everyone else's, and the same people may review the journal extension.

Triage each comment:

Comment typeAction in camera-readyBudget guard
Factual/math error caughtfix unconditionallyalways fits
Ambiguity that misled a reviewerrewrite the passagehigh priority
Missing referenceadd itcheap
"Add experiment X"usually defer to journal version; add only if data exists8-page total final limit
Stylistic tasteyour calllowest
Requests contradicting each otherpick one, note the tension in limitations—

Remember the geometry: submissions ran 6 content + 2 reference pages, while the 2026 final limit was 8 pages total including references — additions compete with your bibliography. Never silently change claims: if a fix weakens a number, the number changes and the text stays honest.

Channel 2: the RA-L response letter (journal pathway)

Work routed through RA-L (see icra-topic-selection) can receive a revise decision, and here a real response letter exists with journal norms:

text
Response structure per point:
  R1.3 (reviewer text quoted verbatim, trimmed fairly)
  > Response: <direct answer first — yes/no/agree/disagree>
  > Change: Sec. III-B, para 2 rewritten; Table II adds the n=15
  >         wrist-mounted condition; Fig. 4 caption now states 1× speed.
  > (If disagreeing) Evidence: <measurement, citation, or derivation —
  >         never volume of prose>
  • Answer every point, including the painful ones; a skipped point reads as concession or evasion.
  • Lead with agreement where genuine — robotics reviewers respond well to "the reviewer is right; trials with the deformable set were added" because added hardware evidence is costly and shows commitment.
  • Keep the letter's tone flat and technical; the AE reads it as a signal of whether a second round will converge.
  • Respect the clock: RA-L revisions run on a fixed schedule within its ~6-month publish-or-reject envelope; start hardware reruns the day the decision lands, not after the letter is drafted.
Show full SKILL.md (300 more words)Show less

Channel 3: the resubmission memo (rejected papers)

A January ICRA reject reaches March IROS or same-week RA-L only through disciplined conversion. Write an internal memo, not a grievance:

  1. Extract every substantive objection; deduplicate across reviewers.
  2. Classify: evidence gap / clarity failure / novelty challenge / scope mismatch (the categories predict different fixes).
  3. For each, decide: fix with new data, fix with rewriting, or consciously accept the risk — with an owner and a date.
  4. Diff the venue: what IROS or RA-L reviewers will additionally expect (RA-L reviewers, for instance, read with journal-permanence standards; a "promising demo" framing must mature into a validated-claim framing).
  5. Reviewer-pool overlap is high across ICRA/IROS/RA-L — assume at least one repeat reader who will check whether their objection was addressed.

Tone calibration (robotics reviewers, specifically)

  • Reviewers here are practitioners; "in a real deployment this would not matter" arguments fail unless backed by deployment data they can see.
  • Concede hardware limits plainly — "the F/T sensor saturates at 50 N, so higher-load trials were not possible" — rather than reframing constraints as choices; the community respects physical honesty.
  • Avoid ML-rebuttal reflexes (citing three new preprints, promising a camera- ready appendix): ICRA has no appendix, and the channels above run on data and page-anchored edits, not citation volume.

Discipline common to all three channels

  • Quote before answering. Restating a comment in your own words invites the accusation of answering a strawman.
  • Evidence outranks assertion. One added table row beats three paragraphs of explanation; in robotics, one new uncut video clip beats both.
  • Track everything. Keep a comment → action → location ledger; it becomes the camera-ready cover note, the RA-L response letter skeleton, or the resubmission changelog respectively.
  • Never fabricate agility. "We have added extensive new experiments" backed by nothing is checkable and fatal with overlapping reviewer pools.

Ledger template

text
| # | Reviewer point (quoted) | Class | Action | Where | Status |
|---|-------------------------|-------|--------|-------|--------|
| R2.1 | "success criterion never defined" | clarity | verbatim criterion added | Sec V-A | done |
| R1.4 | "compare against MPC baseline" | evidence | n=20 MPC trials run | Tab III | data 6/12 |
| R3.2 | "extend to deformables" | scope | deferred; limitation stated | Sec VII | done |

Output format

text
[Channel] camera-ready / RA-L letter / resubmission memo
[Comment ledger] <n> points: fix-now <n> / defer-stated <n> / risk-accepted <n>
[Evidence adds] <new trials/tables/clips committed, with dates>
[Page impact] fits final limit? <y/n + what moves>
[Repeat-reviewer check] objections addressed verbatim-quotably: y/n
[Deadline] <channel deadline and working backward date>

© 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 ICRA-Skills/skills/icra-author-response of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23

Compare with similar skills

Icra 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.

Icra Author Response compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Icra Author Response this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1.2k—~1.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Hypothesis Generationspacering-net/codeg3.9k14 repos~3.6kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT
GitHub Deep Researchbytedance/deer-flow84k4 repos~1.3kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Nature Paper CardYuan1z0825/nature-skills47k2 repos~2.1kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Content Research Writerweapp-tailwindcss/weapp-tailwindcss1.9k25 repos~3.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Last30daysmvanhorn/last30days-skill64k—~7.9kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT

Similar skills

  • Hypothesis Generation

    spacering-net/codeg

    Structured hypothesis formulation from observations. An agent skill from spacering-net/codeg.

    3.9k GitHub starsUsed in 14 repos~3.6k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes

  • 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.

    84k GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~1.3k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed

  • 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.

    47k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~2.1k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed

  • 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.

    1.9k GitHub starsUsed in 25 repos~3.5k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check passed

  • Last30days

    mvanhorn/last30days-skill

    Research what people actually say about any topic in the last 30 days.

    64k GitHub stars~7.9k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes

  • Peer Review

    spacering-net/codeg

    Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.

    3.9k GitHub starsUsed in 17 repos~5.9k tokens
    Research & ScienceAuto-check: notes

More from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

All 2,387 skills in this repo

  • Aaag Data Analysis

    brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

    A skill your agent uses when running and reporting the analysis for an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial statistics and modeling, remote-sensing accuracy, or…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • Aaag Literature Positioning

    brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

    A skill your agent uses when positioning an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript in the literature — engaging geographic scholarship across the relevant area and the…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • Aaag Rebuttal

    brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

    A skill your agent uses when responding to an Annals of the American Association of Geographers decision letter (major/minor revision) — building a point-by-point response to the subject editor and…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • Aaag Research Design

    brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

    A skill your agent uses when defending the research design of an Annals of the American Association of Geographers manuscript — spatial/quantitative analysis and GIScience, remote-sensing and…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • Aaag Review Process

    brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

    A skill your agent uses when you need to understand how the Annals of the American Association of Geographers evaluates a manuscript — double-anonymous review routed through a subject editor by…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed

  • Aaag Submission

    brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills

    A skill your agent uses when running the final pre-submission preflight for the Annals of the American Association of Geographers via ScholarOne Manuscripts — area/article-type selection…

    1.2k GitHub stars~1.6k tokensUpdated 14 days ago
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Icra Author Response

What does Icra Author Response do?

A skill your agent uses when responding to ICRA reviews in the channels that actually exist — turning decision-day reviewer comments into a disciplined camera-ready revision, writing the…. Icra Author Response is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when responding to ICRA reviews in the channels that actually exist — turning decision-day reviewer comments into a disciplined camera-ready revision, writing the revise-and-resubmit response letter on the RA-L pathway, or converting an ICRA reject into a targeted IROS or RA-L resubmission — since classic ICRA offers no rebuttal.

When should I use Icra Author Response?

Icra Author Response fits situations like: writing the revise-and-resubmit response letter on the RA-L pathway; converting an ICRA reject into a targeted IROS; RA-L resubmission — since classic ICRA offers no rebuttal.

How do I install Icra Author Response in Claude Code?

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

How do I install Icra Author Response in Codex?

Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill icra-author-response -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (ICRA-Skills/skills/icra-author-response in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/icra-author-response in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Icra 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 icra-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/icra-author-response, .gemini/skills/icra-author-response, .github/skills/icra-author-response and .opencode/skills/icra-author-response in your project.

What does Icra Author Response need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Icra Author Response is instructions for the agent only.

Does Icra 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 Icra 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 Icra Author Response use?

Icra 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 Icra 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 Icra Author Response?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Icra 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 Icra 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.