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 a MICRO submission is judged — the double-blind HotCRP pipeline from the April deadline through the June rebuttal/revision window to the early-July…
MITAuto-check passed
Install Micro Review Process
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill micro-review-process -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process .claude/skills/micro-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 "micro-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process into .claude/skills/micro-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-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 micro-review-process -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process .agents/skills/micro-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 "micro-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process into .agents/skills/micro-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "micro-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 micro-review-process -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process .cursor/skills/micro-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 "micro-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process into .cursor/skills/micro-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "micro-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 MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-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 micro-review-process -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process .gemini/skills/micro-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 "micro-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process into .gemini/skills/micro-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "micro-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 micro-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 micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process .github/skills/micro-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 "micro-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process into .github/skills/micro-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "micro-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 micro-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 micro-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/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process .opencode/skills/micro-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 "micro-review-process" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process into .opencode/skills/micro-review-process/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "micro-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
micro-review-process- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~1.6k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 743 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 a MICRO submission is judged — the double-blind HotCRP pipeline from the April deadline through the June rebuttal/revision window to the early-July…
- Works in 5 steps: Mechanism novelty and clarity — is there… → Methodology credibility — simulator,… → Evidence-claim match — simulation claims… → …
- What reviewers score in a microarchitecture paper
- SKILL.md covers 2026 cycle timeline (verified), What the process is known to…, What reviewers weigh in a… and Reading the outcome space, plus 4 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Micro Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how a MICRO submission is judged — the double-blind HotCRP pipeline from the April deadline through the June rebuttal/revision window to the early-July notification, what reviewers score in a microarchitecture paper, the professional-conduct rules, and how the new Industry Track review differs.
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
- What reviewers score in a microarchitecture paper
- The professional-conduct rules
- How the new Industry Track review differs
Example prompts
- “/micro-review-process”
Workflow steps
5 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- Mechanism novelty and clarity — is there a new hardware idea, stated at
- Methodology credibility — simulator, baseline strength, workloads, sampling;
- Evidence-claim match — simulation claims sized to simulation fidelity
- Cost honesty — storage/area/power/latency accounting present and plausible.
- Significance — does the headroom captured justify silicon change; would
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 Review Process loads about 1.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 85 tokens; SKILL.md has 743 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). 743 words, ~1,648 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/micro-review-process/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- micro-review-process
- description
- Use when reasoning about how a MICRO submission is judged — the double-blind HotCRP pipeline from the April deadline through the June rebuttal/revision window to the early-July notification, what reviewers score in a microarchitecture paper, the professional-conduct rules, and how the new Industry Track review differs.
MICRO Review Process
Model of the pipeline a MICRO submission enters, anchored to the 2026 (59th) cycle
as verified 2026-07-08. Committee composition and internal mechanics vary by year
and are only partly public — items marked 待核实 must be reconfirmed on
microarch.org/micro59/ before being repeated as fact.
2026 cycle timeline (verified)
| Gate | Date | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Abstract registration | March 31, 2026, 11:59 PM EDT | Hard gate for paper upload |
| Full paper | April 7, 2026, 11:59 PM EDT | HotCRP: micro2026.hotcrp.com |
| Rebuttal / revision window | June 3–17, 2026 | Two weeks — unusually long |
| Notification | July 7, 2026 | |
| Camera-ready | September 11, 2026 | |
| Symposium | Oct 31 – Nov 4, 2026, Athens |
The eight-week gap between upload and rebuttal is when reviews are written; the three weeks after the window close is discussion and the decision meeting.
What the process is known to enforce
- Double-blind, end to end. Anonymity obligations persist through the rebuttal/revision window; artifact links stay anonymized the whole time.
- Format policing with teeth. Submissions are inspected visually and
automatically; violations can reject a paper even after the HotCRP checker
passed it (see
micro-submission). - A professional-conduct clause covering both directions. The 2026 guidelines state that abusive or inappropriate language in reviews, comments, or rebuttals can be grounds for dismissing reviewers, rejecting papers, and reporting to ACM and IEEE. Anger in a rebuttal is not just ineffective at MICRO — it is enumerated as a rejection ground.
- A separate Industry Track review. The inaugural 2026 track advertises a review process tailored to production work — evidence standards that accommodate proprietary constraints. Main-track novelty framing and industry-track deployment framing are different games; know which one your paper entered.
What reviewers weigh in a microarchitecture paper
Composite of the community's public reviewing norms (not a quoted rubric — 待核实 against any published review form for the current cycle):
- Mechanism novelty and clarity — is there a new hardware idea, stated at implementable precision?
- Methodology credibility — simulator, baseline strength, workloads, sampling; the fastest score-killer in this community.
- Evidence-claim match — simulation claims sized to simulation fidelity
(
micro-experimentsinstrument ladder). - Cost honesty — storage/area/power/latency accounting present and plausible.
- Significance — does the headroom captured justify silicon change; would anyone build it?
A practical corollary: reviewer expertise at MICRO skews toward methodology forensics. Expect at least one review that reconstructs your simulator config from the paper and interrogates the discrepancies.
Reading the outcome space
MICRO 2026's public timeline names one rebuttal/revision window and one notification date; whether the cycle offered conditional accepts or shepherding is 待核实. Plan against the simple model:
accept -> camera-ready sprint (Sept 11) + artifact evaluation decision
reject -> triage: fixable-methodology vs wrong-venue vs insufficient-headroom
next slots: ASPLOS Sept 9 '26 · ISCA Nov 17 '26 · HPCA July '27 · MICRO Apr '27
resubmit rule: fix what reviews falsified, re-verify every date on live pagesKeep the reviews regardless of outcome — architecture PCs overlap heavily across MICRO/ISCA/HPCA/ASPLOS, and a resubmission that ignores prior reviews may meet its own reviewer again.
Show full SKILL.md (304 more words)Show less
Anatomy of a typical architecture review
Expect each review to contain, in some order: a summary paragraph (check it — a wrong summary means the paper failed to communicate, and the rebuttal's first job is a polite correction), a strengths list, a weaknesses list where methodology items dominate, and detailed questions. Useful triage signals:
- A review whose weaknesses are all questions is winnable in rebuttal; a review whose weaknesses are all assertions needs numbers to move.
- The most senior-sounding review is not automatically the decision driver; the review with the most specific methodology engagement usually is.
- Uniform mid-scores with shallow text often mean the paper landed outside every reviewer's exact expertise — a topic-checkbox lesson for the resubmission.
Score scales, reviewer counts, and whether an online discussion precedes the PC meeting are internal mechanics that vary by year: 待核实, do not assume.
Leverage points for authors
- Before submission: topic checkboxes in HotCRP (steer toward mechanism expertise), abstract quality (bidding happens on it), format cleanliness.
- During review: nothing. Do not update linked repos in identifying ways; the submission is frozen.
- Rebuttal window: the only mid-process input — see
micro-author-responsefor how to spend two weeks well. - After notification: AE participation (badges strengthen the published record), Top Picks nomination season (IEEE Micro selects from the year's architecture papers).
Calibrating expectations
Flagship-architecture acceptance rates historically sit in the high-teens to
low-twenties percent (exact per-year figures 待核实 from PC-chair reports or the
proceedings front matter — do not quote a number without a source). The planning
consequence is not pessimism but lattice thinking: a strong paper's expected
path to publication is one to two cycles across the four venues, which is why
micro-workflow treats every submission as having a plan B with a date on it,
and why reviews — even from a rejection — are the highest-value artifact the
process returns.
Output format
[Stage] pre-submission / under review / rebuttal window / post-notification
[Days to next gate] <N days to date, per verified timeline>
[Reviewer-lens self-score] mechanism / methodology / evidence-match / cost / significance: 1-5 each
[Conduct check] rebuttal tone professional: yes / revise
[Outcome plan] accept path + reject path both written: yes / no
[待核实 before quoting] <items to reconfirm on microarch.org>© 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-review-process of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Micro 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Micro Review Process this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~1.6k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Deepseek Reasonruvnet/ruflo | 74k | — | ~626 | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| JudgeNeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit | 1.7k | — | ~2k | Automated safety check: Pass | GPL-3.0 | |
| Ejentum Reasoning Harnesssickn33/agentic-awesome-skills | 47k | 1 repos | ~1.9k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| LobeHub Micro App Splitting Guidelobehub/lobehub | 83k | — | ~9.3k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Do And JudgeNeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit | 1.7k | — | ~14k | Automated safety check: Pass | GPL-3.0 |
Similar skills
Judge
NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
Launch a meta-judge then a judge sub-agent to evaluate results produced in the current conversation
Ejentum Reasoning Harness
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
MCP server exposing four cognitive harness modes (reasoning, code, anti-deception, memory).
LobeHub Micro App Splitting Guide
lobehub/lobehub
Documents how LobeHub's standalone micro apps are hosted, built and routed differently on Cloud versus self-hosted Docker, so a change does not break one path while fixing the other.
Do And Judge
NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
Execute a task with sub-agent implementation and LLM-as-a-judge verification with automatic retry loop
Nowait Reasoning Optimizer
davila7/claude-code-templates
Implements the NOWAIT technique for efficient reasoning in R1-style LLMs.
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 Micro Review Process
What does Micro Review Process do?
A skill your agent uses when reasoning about how a MICRO submission is judged — the double-blind HotCRP pipeline from the April deadline through the June rebuttal/revision window to the early-July…. Micro Review Process is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when reasoning about how a MICRO submission is judged — the double-blind HotCRP pipeline from the April deadline through the June rebuttal/revision window to the early-July notification, what reviewers score in a microarchitecture paper, the professional-conduct rules, and how the new Industry Track review differs.
When should I use Micro Review Process?
Micro Review Process fits situations like: what reviewers score in a microarchitecture paper; the professional-conduct rules; how the new Industry Track review differs.
How do I install Micro Review Process in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill micro-review-process -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/micro-review-process in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Micro Review Process in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill micro-review-process -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (MICRO-Skills/skills/micro-review-process in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/micro-review-process in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Micro 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 micro-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/micro-review-process, .gemini/skills/micro-review-process, .github/skills/micro-review-process and .opencode/skills/micro-review-process in your project.
What does Micro Review Process need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Micro Review Process is instructions for the agent only.
Does Micro 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 Micro 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 Micro Review Process use?
Micro 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 Micro Review Process use?
About 1.6k 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 Review Process?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Micro Review Process: Deepseek Reason (ruvnet/ruflo, 74k stars), Judge (NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit, 1.7k stars), Ejentum Reasoning Harness (sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills, 47k stars) and LobeHub Micro App Splitting Guide (lobehub/lobehub, 83k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Micro 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.