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

Micro Author Response

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

A skill your agent uses when reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision, answering methodology attacks…

MITAuto-check passedResearch & Science

Install Micro Author Response

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

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

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-author-response .claude/skills/micro-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
micro-author-response
GitHub stars
1.2k
Token cost
~1.7k tokens
SKILL.md length
770 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
2,387
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

A skill your agent uses when reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision, answering methodology attacks…

  • Works in 4 steps: The objection most likely to flip a… → Any misread shared by 2+ reviewers… → New-experiment results, compressed to… → …
  • Reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision
  • SKILL.md covers Hour zero: classify before…, The MICRO-specific physics of…, Response architecture and Sentence surgery: weak versus…, plus 4 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Micro Author Response is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision, answering methodology attacks with runs and configs rather than promises, keeping anonymity intact, and staying inside MICRO's professional-conduct rules for rebuttals.

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. 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

  • Reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision
  • Answering methodology attacks with runs and configs rather than promises
  • Keeping anonymity intact
  • Staying inside MICROs professional-conduct rules for rebuttals

Example prompts

  • “/micro-author-response”

Workflow steps

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

  1. The objection most likely to flip a negative review — usually the sharpest
  2. Any misread shared by 2+ reviewers (cheap, high yield).
  3. New-experiment results, compressed to geomean + worst case + pointer.
  4. Everything else in one-line acknowledgments.

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

Micro Author Response loads about 1.7k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 85 tokens; SKILL.md has 770 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~85
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~1.7k

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). 770 words, ~1,651 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/micro-author-response/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
micro-author-response
description
Use when reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision, answering methodology attacks with runs and configs rather than promises, keeping anonymity intact, and staying inside MICRO's professional-conduct rules for rebuttals.

MICRO Author Response

MICRO 2026 scheduled a combined rebuttal/revision window, June 3–17 — two full weeks, which is generous by conference standards and changes the strategy: there is time to run new experiments, not merely to argue. Whether the cycle permitted an updated PDF versus text-only responses is 待核实 on the live pages; the playbook below works under either mechanic.

Hour zero: classify before drafting

Read all reviews twice, then sort every distinct objection into exactly one bucket:

BucketExampleWinning move
Factual misread"No overhead analysis" — but Table 5 existsPoint precisely: "Table 5, rows 3–6"
Methodology doubt"Baseline prefetcher looks untuned"Run the check they imply; report numbers
Missing experiment"How does this behave at 16 cores?"Two weeks is enough — run it
Scope disagreement"Should also handle GPUs"Bound the claim; do not promise a new paper
Taste / significance"Gains feel incremental"Reframe headroom-captured %, cite the oracle bound

Decision-relevant buckets are the middle three. A rebuttal that spends its length on the misreads and the taste disputes has conceded the methodology fight.

The MICRO-specific physics of rebuttals

  • Methodology objections dominate outcomes here. This community's reviewers audit configs (see micro-review-process). The strongest rebuttal sentence at MICRO is a number from a run completed inside the window: "With the reviewer's suggested DRAM timing, geomean speedup moves from 8.4% to 8.1% (per-workload data in the response)."
  • The two-week window is a lab sprint. Pre-stage it: keep the simulator tree and manifests warm from April (the micro-reproducibility ledger exists for this). Budget days 1–2 triage, days 3–10 runs, days 11–13 drafting, day 14 buffer.
  • Anonymity persists. No identifying repo updates, no "in our ISCA paper" — the guidelines keep double-blind obligations alive through this window.
  • Tone is enumerated policy. MICRO's 2026 guidelines make unprofessional language in rebuttals grounds for rejection and for reporting to ACM/IEEE. Strip every trace of indignation; a hostile reviewer is answered with data and courtesy.

Response architecture

text
Global note (3-5 lines): the one misunderstanding shared by multiple reviews,
corrected once with evidence pointers. New results summarized in one table.

Per reviewer, numbered:
  R1.Q1  [misread]     Table 5 rows 3-6 report exactly this; summary: ...
  R1.Q2  [new run]     Ran 16-core config (same manifest, cores=16):
                       geomean 6.9%, no regression beyond -1.2% (mcf). 
  R2.Q1  [scope]       Agreed this targets CPUs; title/claims already scoped; GPU
                       extension noted as future work, no claim made.
Close each: what text will change in the final version (one line, concrete).

Rules of the form: answer the question asked, lead with the number, never promise what you did not run ("we will evaluate X" convinces nobody at a venue that can check), and never introduce a result you cannot back with a manifest.

Sentence surgery: weak versus strong response lines

Weak (deflects)Strong (answers)
"We believe our baseline is reasonable.""The baseline matches [12]'s config (Table 2); its SPEC-int MPKI of 4.1 sits inside the published 3.8–4.4 envelope."
"We will add this experiment to the final version.""We ran it: at 16 cores, geomean 6.9% (was 6.2% at 8), full table below."
"The reviewer misunderstands our mechanism.""To clarify §4.2: marking does not evict; eviction waits for a demand miss, so a false positive costs a re-fetch only if the line was truly reused."
"This is orthogonal to our contribution.""Agreed it is out of scope; the claims in §1 are already limited to CPUs, and we will make that explicit in the abstract."

The pattern in every strong line: a location in the paper, a number, or a bounded concession — something the reviewer can verify without trusting you.

Show full SKILL.md (264 more words)Show less

Prioritization under a length cap

If the cycle imposes a word/character cap (待核实), spend it in this order:

  1. The objection most likely to flip a negative review — usually the sharpest methodology doubt from the most engaged reviewer.
  2. Any misread shared by 2+ reviewers (cheap, high yield).
  3. New-experiment results, compressed to geomean + worst case + pointer.
  4. Everything else in one-line acknowledgments.

Reviewers who see their main concern answered with a run tend to advocate in the discussion phase; reviewers who see it deflected tend to dig in.

Coordinating a multi-author response

The two-week window fails most often on coordination, not content:

  • Assign one owner per reviewer (drafts that reviewer's answers) and one editor who merges voices into a single register — patchwork tone reads as disarray.
  • The runs and the prose proceed in parallel: owners draft placeholder sentences with [NUMBER] holes while the queue executes; the editor rejects any placeholder that survives to day 13.
  • Freeze at day 14 minus 12 hours. Last-minute additions skip the tone audit and the manifest check — the two audits this venue punishes skipping.

After submission of the response

Nothing more can be sent — hold to that even if a reviewer question haunts you; unsolicited chair contact to append arguments reads badly at any venue. Log what was promised (the "text will change" lines) — they become the camera-ready worklist if accepted (micro-camera-ready) and the revision spec if rejected (micro-workflow fallback lattice). Archive the new runs' manifests beside the response text; whichever way July 7 goes, that evidence gets reused. Notification for the 2026 cycle: July 7.

Output format

text
[Objection ledger] misread N · methodology N · new-experiment N · scope N · taste N
[Flip target] <reviewer + objection chosen as priority 1, and why>
[Run plan] experiments launchable in window: list with day estimates
[New numbers] <headline results produced during window, manifest paths>
[Tone audit] zero sarcasm/indignation: confirmed
[Promises logged] camera-ready worklist entries: N

© 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 MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-author-response of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23

Compare with similar skills

Micro 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.

Micro Author Response compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Micro Author Response this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills1.2k—~1.7kAutomated 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
Peer Reviewspacering-net/codeg3.9k17 repos~5.9kAutomated 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

  • 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

  • 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

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

Categories

Questions about Micro Author Response

What does Micro Author Response do?

A skill your agent uses when reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision, answering methodology attacks…. Micro Author Response is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision, answering methodology attacks with runs and configs rather than promises, keeping anonymity intact, and staying inside MICRO's professional-conduct rules for rebuttals.

When should I use Micro Author Response?

Micro Author Response fits situations like: reviews arrive for a MICRO submission and the rebuttal/revision window opens — triaging reviewer objections by what can change a decision; answering methodology attacks with runs and configs rather than promises; keeping anonymity intact; staying inside MICROs professional-conduct rules for rebuttals.

How do I install Micro Author Response in Claude Code?

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

How do I install Micro Author Response in Codex?

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

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

What does Micro Author Response need to run?

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

Does Micro 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 Micro 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 Micro Author Response use?

Micro 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 Micro Author Response 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 Micro Author Response?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Micro 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 Micro Author Response?

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.