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

Isca Review Process

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

A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves, what the combined rebuttal-and-revision…

MITAuto-check passed

Install Isca Review Process

skills CLI
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill isca-review-process -a claude-code

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

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills isca-review-process --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/ISCA-Skills/skills/isca-review-process .claude/skills/isca-review-process && 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
isca-review-process
GitHub stars
1.2k
Token cost
~1.6k tokens
SKILL.md length
749 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 ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves, what the combined rebuttal-and-revision…

  • Reasoning about how an ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves
  • SKILL.md covers The 2026 pipeline as verified, What two rounds imply, The combined rebuttal/revision… and Inside the committee room…, plus 3 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
  • What the combined rebuttal-and-revision window means for decisions

What it does

Isca Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves, what the combined rebuttal-and-revision window means for decisions, PC-meeting dynamics at a flagship architecture venue, and how to read the eventual outcome.

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.

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 ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves
  • What the combined rebuttal-and-revision window means for decisions
  • PC-meeting dynamics at a flagship architecture venue
  • How to read the eventual outcome

Example prompts

  • “/isca-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

Isca Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 79 tokens; SKILL.md has 749 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~79
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). 749 words, ~1,635 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/isca-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
isca-review-process
description
Use when reasoning about how an ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves, what the combined rebuttal-and-revision window means for decisions, PC-meeting dynamics at a flagship architecture venue, and how to read the eventual outcome.

ISCA Review Process

Knowing the pipeline changes author behavior at three points: how the paper is written (for two waves of readers), how the February window is used (it permits revision, not just argument), and how the decision is interpreted. The stage structure below is the verified ISCA 2026 calendar; internal committee mechanics are described as community-typical practice, labeled as such, because programs rarely publish them.

The 2026 pipeline as verified

Stage2026 datesAuthor-visible?
Abstract registrationNov 10, 2025yes — HotCRP
Paper submissionNov 17, 2025yes
Round 1 reviews writtendue Dec 19, 2025no (delivered later)
Round 2 reviews writtendue Feb 13, 2026no
Rebuttal + revision windowFeb 16 - Mar 6, 2026yes — the pack's pivot point
PC deliberation and decisionsafter the window; exact 2026 date 待核实outcome only
ConferenceJun 27 - Jul 1, 2026, Raleighyes

What two rounds imply

A two-round structure typically means an early wave of reviews on every paper, after which papers that remain viable receive additional expert reviews in the second round. Two operational consequences for authors:

  • The paper must survive a first reading by a possibly non-specialist architect. Round 1 breadth is why the introduction and motivation section carry so much weight (isca-writing-style): a paper that requires subarea fluency to appreciate may not reach the readers who have it.
  • Review counts differ across papers. Receiving five or six reviews usually signals second-round attention; receiving few does not reliably signal anything. Do not decode fate from counts — the window that follows is the same either way.

The combined rebuttal/revision window

The distinctive verified fact of the 2026 cycle: authors got a three-week window (Feb 16 - Mar 6) described as a rebuttal/revision period — long enough to run experiments and change the PDF, not merely to file 500 words of protest. Venues design such windows so the committee can conditionally like a paper: reviewers name concrete deficiencies, authors demonstrate the fix is real, and the PC judges the demonstrated fix rather than a promise. Strategy and mechanics for the author side live in isca-author-response; the process-level points:

  • Reviews arriving at window-open are the complete input you will get; there is no later dialogue round to clarify misreadings. Everything must land in this window's artifacts.
  • Reviewers reconvene (online discussion, then a PC meeting) with your response and any revision in front of them. The audience is the whole paper's discussion group, including reviewers who liked it and need ammunition to defend it.
Show full SKILL.md (339 more words)Show less

Inside the committee room (typical practice, not CFP text)

Flagship architecture PCs conventionally work discussion lists ordered by average score, with each paper championed or buried in minutes of conversation. Patterns worth internalizing:

  • A paper without a champion — one reviewer willing to spend social capital — rarely survives discussion regardless of decent scores. Rebuttals should be written to arm the champion, not to defeat the detractor.
  • Expertise asymmetry is normal: the most negative review is often the least expert. The committee usually knows this; a calm, factual response lets them discount it. An irritated response makes the room defend its colleague.
  • Methodology objections travel well in the room ("the baseline is untuned" fits in one sentence); nuanced defenses do not. This is why methodology rigor up front (isca-experiments) is cheaper than any rebuttal.
  • Conflicted members leave the room; your conflict declarations are what make that machinery work (isca-submission).

Reading the outcome

text
ACCEPT            -> isca-camera-ready + isca-artifact-evaluation immediately;
                     June presentation logistics.
ACCEPT-with-shepherd (if used) -> the shepherd's list is a contract; satisfy it
                     completely and visibly in the camera-ready.
REJECT, reviews engage the mechanism -> the idea was heard; fix the named
                     deficiencies and retarget (MICRO spring / HPCA summer)
                     with the reviews as a to-do list.
REJECT, reviews dispute the premise -> the community doesn't buy the problem;
                     more results won't help — reframe or re-venue
                     (isca-topic-selection).
REJECT, reviews are thin/confused   -> often a routing casualty; check whether
                     your abstract-step topics steered assignment badly before
                     blaming the idea.

Whether ISCA 2027 uses the same round structure, offers a revision phase at all, or publishes different outcome categories is unverified — the 2027 CFP was not posted at check time (待核实).

Confidentiality and conduct

Submissions are confidential review material: do not publicize reviews, do not contact suspected reviewers, and route irregularities (leaked identity, hostile review, suspected conflict violation) to the program chairs through official channels only. Public deadline-week complaints are read by exactly the community that reviews your next five papers.

Author-side calendar hooks

  • At submission: file the five hardest anticipated objections with pre-computed answers (isca-workflow makes this a named role).
  • Window-open minus one week: environment resurrection drill — the simulator tree, configs, and workloads must run (isca-reproducibility).
  • Window-open: triage day (see isca-author-response); no experiments before triage completes.
  • Decision day: run the outcome tree above within 48 hours while morale allows planning.

Calendar facts from ../../resources/official-source-map.md (verified 2026-07-08); committee-mechanics paragraphs are labeled community practice and should be re-weighed against any process description the 2027 chairs publish. Whenever a live 2027 reviewer-instructions page appears, it supersedes every "typical practice" paragraph in this file — update the source map first, then this skill.

© 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 ISCA-Skills/skills/isca-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23

Compare with similar skills

Isca 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.

Isca Review Process compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Isca Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1.2k—~1.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Arize Evaluatorgithub/awesome-copilot40k1 repos~8.1kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT
LLM Evaluationdavila7/claude-code-templates32k12 repos~3.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Agent Evaluationsickn33/agentic-awesome-skills47k1 repos~2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Deepseek Reasonruvnet/ruflo74k—~626Automated safety check: NotesMIT
EvaluatorsArize-ai/phoenix12k—~1.7kAutomated safety check: PassCustom licence

Similar skills

  • Arize Evaluator

    github/awesome-copilot

    Official

    Handles LLM-as-judge evaluation workflows on Arize including creating/updating evaluators, running evaluations on spans or experiments, managing tasks, trigger-run operations, column mapping, and…

    40k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~8.1k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check: notes

  • LLM Evaluation

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 12 repos~3.5k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed

  • Agent Evaluation

    sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

    Evaluate agent behavior with versioned cases and explicit verifiers.

    47k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2k tokens
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed

  • Deepseek Reason

    ruvnet/ruflo

    Reasoning-mode completion against DeepSeek's deepseek-reasoner model (R1) via /v1/chat/completions.

    74k GitHub stars~626 tokensUpdated today
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check: notes

  • Evaluators

    Arize-ai/phoenix

    Author or refine a Phoenix evaluator — code or LLM-as-a-judge — that scores a run's output.

    12k GitHub stars~1.7k tokensUpdated today
    EducationAuto-check passed

  • Agent Evaluation Reporting

    sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

    A skill your agent uses when summarizing agent evaluations where autonomous, assisted, failed, timed-out, or invalid outcomes must remain distinct and comparable.

    47k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2.1k tokens
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed

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 12 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 12 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 12 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 12 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 12 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 12 days ago
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Isca Review Process

What does Isca Review Process do?

A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how an ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves, what the combined rebuttal-and-revision…. Isca Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how an ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves, what the combined rebuttal-and-revision window means for decisions, PC-meeting dynamics at a flagship architecture venue, and how to read the eventual outcome.

When should I use Isca Review Process?

Isca Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how an ISCA submission is evaluated — the two-round review structure with December and February reviewer waves; what the combined rebuttal-and-revision window means for decisions; PC-meeting dynamics at a flagship architecture venue; how to read the eventual outcome.

How do I install Isca Review Process in Claude Code?

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

How do I install Isca Review Process in Codex?

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

Can I use Isca 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 isca-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/isca-review-process, .gemini/skills/isca-review-process, .github/skills/isca-review-process and .opencode/skills/isca-review-process in your project.

What does Isca Review Process need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Isca Review Process is instructions for the agent only.

Does Isca 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 Isca 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 Isca Review Process use?

Isca 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 Isca Review Process use?

About 1.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.5k 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 Isca Review Process?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Isca Review Process: Arize Evaluator (github/awesome-copilot, 40k stars), LLM Evaluation (davila7/claude-code-templates, 32k stars), Agent Evaluation (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars) and Deepseek Reason (ruvnet/ruflo, 74k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Isca 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.