Peer Review
K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer
Prepare evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments.
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal, area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility…
Install Kdd Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill kdd-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills kdd-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/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process .claude/skills/kdd-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 "kdd-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process into .claude/skills/kdd-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "kdd-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/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-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 kdd-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills kdd-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/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process .agents/skills/kdd-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 "kdd-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process into .agents/skills/kdd-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "kdd-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 kdd-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills kdd-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/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process .cursor/skills/kdd-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 "kdd-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process into .cursor/skills/kdd-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "kdd-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 KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-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 kdd-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills kdd-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/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process .gemini/skills/kdd-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 "kdd-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process into .gemini/skills/kdd-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "kdd-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 kdd-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 kdd-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/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process .github/skills/kdd-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 "kdd-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process into .github/skills/kdd-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "kdd-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 kdd-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 kdd-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/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process .opencode/skills/kdd-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 "kdd-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process into .opencode/skills/kdd-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "kdd-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
kdd-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.7k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 706 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 KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal, area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility…
- Reasoning about how KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal
- SKILL.md covers Decision machinery, The three-outcome game, Who reviews at KDD and Review-integrity rules worth…, plus 5 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
- Area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility and ethics
What it does
Kdd Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal, area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility and ethics, PC-chair decisions, the Resubmit outcome feeding the next cycle, the mixed academic-industry reviewer pool, and generative-AI review rules.
Its SKILL.md is about 1.7k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.
It sits in Research & Science, covering Reproducible research. 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 KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal
- Area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility and ethics
- PC-chair decisions
- The Resubmit outcome feeding the next cycle
Example prompts
- “/kdd-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
Kdd Review Process loads about 1.7k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 87 tokens; SKILL.md has 706 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). 706 words, ~1,660 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/kdd-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- kdd-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal, area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility and ethics, PC-chair decisions, the Resubmit outcome feeding the next cycle, the mixed academic-industry reviewer pool, and generative-AI review rules.
KDD Review Process
Use this to model decisions rather than guess at them. KDD review runs on OpenReview,
per track and per cycle (the venue groups are literally named by track x cycle, e.g.
Research_Track_Cycle_2). Reconfirm the current cycle's mechanics before relying on
any stage detail — KDD tunes its process between cycles, not just between years.
Decision machinery
- Reviewers score against the CFP's stated factors: technical merit, originality, potential impact, quality of execution, quality of presentation, related work, reproducibility of results, and ethics.
- Authors respond to each review in the rebuttal window — text only, no hyperlinks.
- Area chairs synthesize reviews, rebuttals, and reviewer discussion into a recommendation.
- PC chairs make final decisions. This last step is real, not ceremonial: calibration across areas happens above the AC.
The three-outcome game
Unlike single-shot venues, KDD's decision space includes Resubmit, and the CFP frames resubmissions that properly address noted concerns as having better odds than fresh submissions. Strategic consequences:
| Outcome | What it means | Author's next move |
|---|---|---|
| Accept | Proceedings slot (uniform 12-page budget) | Camera-ready via e-rights + TAPS (kdd-camera-ready) |
| Resubmit | Fixable weaknesses named; invitation to the next cycle | Address concerns, declare prior forum id, prepend one-page change summary (kdd-supplementary) |
| Reject | Fit or soundness failure | Re-route (kdd-topic-selection) or rebuild before any KDD return |
Treat reviews of a Resubmit paper as a contract: the next cycle's AC sees the old forum, so selectively ignoring named concerns is visible and costly.
Who reviews at KDD
The pool mixes academic data-mining researchers with industry practitioners — a KDD-specific blend with predictable reading patterns:
- The academic reader audits novelty against the mining literature and checks whether ablations isolate the claimed mechanism.
- The practitioner reader audits data realism: temporal splits, leakage, baseline tuning symmetry, and whether "deployable" claims survive contact with production constraints.
- A paper that satisfies one reader and insults the other (elegant method on toy splits; solid system with no delta over known methods) lands in the borderline pile where the rebuttal decides.
Review-integrity rules worth knowing as an author
- KDD 2026 forbade reviewers from pasting any passage of a paper under review into generative-AI tools verbatim, and required authors to disclose their own generative-AI use in the submission form. Symmetrically, your rebuttal should not read as unedited model output — ACs increasingly discount it.
- Confidentiality runs both directions; do not cite or publicize reviewer text during the process.
Reading a KDD review packet
Triage order for a 3-4 review packet:
1. Extract every sentence naming a missing experiment, baseline, or
leakage risk -> these are Resubmit-contract items.
2. Classify each reviewer: academic-lens / practitioner-lens / unclear
(their objections need different evidence types in rebuttal).
3. Find the AC-visible consensus: an objection raised independently
twice outweighs any single reviewer's pet issue.
4. Score your realistic ceiling: all-borderline packets are rebuttal-
winnable; a unanimous soundness objection is a next-cycle project.Show full SKILL.md (313 more words)Show less
Cycle dynamics
- Two cycles a year change the rejection calculus: the distance from a Cycle 1 decision to the Cycle 2 deadline is short, so "fix and resubmit" is a same-year path — plan experiment capacity for it before the decision arrives.
- Per-cycle notification and discussion dates for the current cycle were not publicly verifiable at pack-build time (待核实); pull them from the OpenReview group or CFP timeline before promising a calendar to co-authors.
Leverage per decision factor
The CFP's factor list is long; leverage over it is not uniform. Where author effort converts into recommendation movement:
| Decision factor | Raises it | Sinks it |
|---|---|---|
| Technical merit | Mechanism isolated by ablation; complexity stated and measured | Gains attributable to tuning asymmetry or leakage |
| Originality | Mechanism-level delta over the KDD lineage | "First to apply X to Y" with no structural argument |
| Potential impact | Evidence someone else can use it (artifact, generality across regimes) | Impact claimed via market-size rhetoric |
| Execution quality | Temporal-safe splits, strong boring baselines | One-seed results at the flagship scale claim |
| Presentation | Regime-first page one; findable evidence | Appendix doing the arguing |
| Related work | Nearest ancestors contrasted, venues correct | Misattributed classics; surveyed families without deltas |
| Reproducibility | Tier-honest availability statements | Paper-artifact contradictions |
| Ethics | Data provenance and consent story stated | Scraped-data hand-waving on human data |
Stage-by-stage realism
- Bidding/assignment: the registered abstract determines who bids; a misleading
abstract buys mismatched experts (
kdd-submission). - Reviews land: score the packet against the ceiling model above before drafting anything; rebuttal energy is finite.
- Discussion: reviewers converge more than they diverge; the rebuttal's job is to arm the sympathetic reviewer with checkable coordinates.
- AC recommendation: written for the PC chairs, so the rebuttal summary line the AC can quote verbatim is the highest-value sentence you write all cycle.
- PC decision: calibration can move borderline cases both directions; nothing an author does at this stage helps, which is why the earlier stages get the effort.
Output format
[Stage] submitted / reviews-in / rebuttal / decision / resubmit-window
[Packet read] R-lenses: <academic/practitioner mix>, consensus objection: <...>
[Realistic ceiling] accept / borderline-rebuttal-decides / resubmit-target
[Resubmit contract] <named concerns that must be addressed if returning>
[Integrity checks] genAI disclosure filed / confidentiality clean
[Next move] <one action with owner>© 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 KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Kdd 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kdd Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.7k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Peer ReviewK-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer | 2.4k | 2 repos | ~3.1k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| CHARLS Paper Reproduction Guidexjtulyc/MedgeClaw | 617 | 1 repos | ~1.8k | Automated safety check: Pass | None | |
| Compute Environment Setupaipoch/open-science | 5.5k | — | ~2.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Figure Styleaipoch/open-science | 5.5k | — | ~5.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | Apache-2.0 | |
| Add Bactopia Toolbactopia/bactopia | 522 | — | ~4.1k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT |
Similar skills
CHARLS Paper Reproduction Guide
xjtulyc/MedgeClaw
Guides an agent through reproducing papers built on the CHARLS health and retirement survey, from variable mapping to cognition, depression and isolation scores.
Compute Environment Setup
aipoch/open-science
Prepares setup instructions and a named activation file for a user-managed software environment on an Open-Science SSH or Slurm compute host.
Figure Style
aipoch/open-science
Publication-grade correctness and legibility rules for final-deliverable scientific figures, not exploratory plots.
Add Bactopia Tool
bactopia/bactopia
Scaffold a complete Bactopia Tool across all three tiers -- module, subworkflow, and workflow entry point under workflows/bactopia-tools/.
Modeling Code and Result Contracts
yushui2022/MathModel-Skill
Generates result-evidence contracts, tables and runnable q1 to q3 modeling code scaffolds for a math modeling paper from a model route, a data plan and cleaned data.
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 Kdd Review Process
What does Kdd Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal, area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility…. Kdd Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal, area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility and ethics, PC-chair decisions, the Resubmit outcome feeding the next cycle, the mixed academic-industry reviewer pool, and generative-AI review rules.
When should I use Kdd Review Process?
Kdd Review Process fits situations like: reasoning about how KDD papers get judged in its dual-cycle OpenReview process: per-review rebuttal; area-chair recommendations weighed on merit through reproducibility and ethics; PC-chair decisions; the Resubmit outcome feeding the next cycle.
How do I install Kdd Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill kdd-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/kdd-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Kdd Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill kdd-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (KDD-Skills/skills/kdd-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/kdd-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Kdd 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 kdd-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/kdd-review-process, .gemini/skills/kdd-review-process, .github/skills/kdd-review-process and .opencode/skills/kdd-review-process in your project.
What does Kdd Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Kdd Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Kdd 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 Kdd 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 Kdd Review Process use?
Kdd 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 Kdd Review Process use?
About 1.7k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 6.6k 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 Kdd Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Kdd Review Process: Peer Review (K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer, 2.4k stars), CHARLS Paper Reproduction Guide (xjtulyc/MedgeClaw, 617 stars), Compute Environment Setup (aipoch/open-science, 5.5k stars) and Figure Style (aipoch/open-science, 5.5k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Kdd Review Process?
brycewang-stanford (a GitHub user) maintains it in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, which has 1,231 GitHub stars. The repository holds 2,387 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on September 27, 2026.
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.