Peer Review
spacering-net/codeg
Structured manuscript/grant review with checklist-based evaluation.
A skill your agent uses when writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit.
Install Popdevr Rebuttal
$ npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill popdevr-rebuttal -a claude-codeProject install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills popdevr-rebuttal --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/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal .claude/skills/popdevr-rebuttal && 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 "popdevr-rebuttal" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal into .claude/skills/popdevr-rebuttal/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "popdevr-rebuttal", 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/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttalType 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 popdevr-rebuttal -a codexProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.codex/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills popdevr-rebuttal --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/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal .agents/skills/popdevr-rebuttal && rm -rf skills-srcUse ~/.agents/skills/ instead of .agents/skills for a personal install.
Codex skills documentation · loads skills from .agents/skills/
Install the "popdevr-rebuttal" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal into .agents/skills/popdevr-rebuttal/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "popdevr-rebuttal", 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 popdevr-rebuttal -a cursorProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.cursor/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills popdevr-rebuttal --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/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal .cursor/skills/popdevr-rebuttal && 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 "popdevr-rebuttal" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal into .cursor/skills/popdevr-rebuttal/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "popdevr-rebuttal", 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 Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal--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 popdevr-rebuttal -a gemini-cliProject install goes to .agents/skills/; add -g for ~/.gemini/skills/.
$ gh skill install brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills popdevr-rebuttal --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/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal .gemini/skills/popdevr-rebuttal && 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 "popdevr-rebuttal" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal into .gemini/skills/popdevr-rebuttal/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "popdevr-rebuttal", 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 popdevr-rebuttalInstalls 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 popdevr-rebuttal -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/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal .github/skills/popdevr-rebuttal && 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 "popdevr-rebuttal" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal into .github/skills/popdevr-rebuttal/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "popdevr-rebuttal", 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 popdevr-rebuttal -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 popdevr-rebuttal --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/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal .opencode/skills/popdevr-rebuttal && 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 "popdevr-rebuttal" agent skill from https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills/tree/main/Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal into .opencode/skills/popdevr-rebuttal/ in this project. Copy the whole folder (SKILL.md and every file beside it), keep the folder name "popdevr-rebuttal", 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
popdevr-rebuttal- GitHub stars
- 1.2k
- Token cost
- ~2k tokens
- SKILL.md length
- 844 words
- Files
- 1
- Skills in repo
- 2,387
- Repo updated
- First seen
- Licence
- MIT
At a glance
A skill your agent uses when writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit.
- Works in 6 steps: Read the editor's letter as the rubric.… → One point-by-point response, every… → Concede or rebut explicitly, with… → …
- Writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR
- SKILL.md covers When to trigger, Strategy, Cross-field response ledger and Conflict-resolution note to…, plus 5 more sections
- Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
What it does
Popdevr Rebuttal is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit. PDR review is double-anonymized and cross-field (demographers and development scholars), so the response must convert every expert reviewer on population substance and on the development meaning, without alienating the editor. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.
Its SKILL.md is about 2k 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 Peer review. The repository describes itself as: Journal-specific Claude Code/Codex skill packs covering mainstream journals — AER, QJE, Nature, Cell, 管理世界, 经济研究 & 200+ more — your fast track to getting published. ｜ 覆盖主流期刊的… The licence is MIT.
When your agent uses it
- Writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR
- Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit
Example prompts
- “/popdevr-rebuttal”
Workflow steps
6 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.
- Read the editor's letter as the rubric. It signals which points are decisive — often the fit, the
- One point-by-point response, every comment addressed. Quote each comment, then respond. Never skip
- Concede or rebut explicitly, with evidence. For each: did what was asked (say where, with the new
- Reconcile cross-field reviewers openly. When the demographer and the development referee pull in
- Protect the contribution. Add robustness (alternative exposures, sensitivity, comparability checks,
- Keep anonymity intact in the revised manuscript (still double-anonymized), apply the APA-style
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
Popdevr Rebuttal loads about 2k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 109 tokens; SKILL.md has 844 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). 844 words, ~2,047 tokens.
Download SKILL.mdSave it as
.claude/skills/popdevr-rebuttal/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).- name
- popdevr-rebuttal
- description
- Use when writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit. PDR review is double-anonymized and cross-field (demographers and development scholars), so the response must convert every expert reviewer on population substance and on the development meaning, without alienating the editor. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.
R&R Rebuttal (popdevr-rebuttal)
A PDR R&R is a real opportunity — editors and referees thought the population-and-development contribution is worth saving. But the editor decides, and the referees are cross-field (a demographer and a development/policy scholar may have reviewed the same paper from different angles), so the response letter must move every reviewer toward yes on both the population substance and its development meaning while keeping the editor confident the revision is convergent.
When to trigger
- An R&R decision arrived and you are planning the revision + response letter
- Reviewers disagree (e.g., a demographer questions the rate construction while a development referee questions the causal/policy claim) and you must reconcile them
- A reviewer requests analyses (a re-decomposition, a sensitivity, an alternative projection, a comparability check) that could change the claims
- Writing the cover note to the editor summarizing the revision
Strategy
- Read the editor's letter as the rubric. It signals which points are decisive — often the fit, the identification, or the development/policy framing. Solve those first; the editor adjudicates disagreements among reviewers.
- One point-by-point response, every comment addressed. Quote each comment, then respond. Never skip one — silence reads as non-compliance.
- Concede or rebut explicitly, with evidence. For each: did what was asked (say where, with the new table/figure number), or push back respectfully with a reason grounded in demographic method or the development logic (why the chosen rate, decomposition, or framing is appropriate). Editors respect a well-argued disagreement more than a capitulation that weakens the paper.
- Reconcile cross-field reviewers openly. When the demographer and the development referee pull in different directions, say so, choose a principled path, and explain the tradeoff. Don't silently satisfy one and ignore the other.
- Protect the contribution. Add robustness (alternative exposures, sensitivity, comparability checks, alternative projections) and clarifications; resist changes that dilute the population-and-development claim or flatten a synthetic essay into a literature summary. Defend scope conditions rather than over-claiming.
- Keep anonymity intact in the revised manuscript (still double-anonymized), apply the APA-style
house formatting now that Free Format's first round is over, and update the data availability
statement and reproducibility materials so new exhibits remain reproducible (see
popdevr-transparency-and-data).
Cross-field response ledger
Build a ledger before drafting prose. PDR revisions often fail when the response satisfies one expert audience while leaving the other unconvinced.
| Comment type | Demographic evidence | Development/policy evidence | Response posture |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rate, denominator, exposure, or population-at-risk concern | alternative rate construction, exposure definition, cohort/person-period logic | explains how the population measure changes the development interpretation | usually concede with a new table or appendix |
| Comparability across countries, periods, or subgroups | harmonization note, sensitivity to definitions, uncertainty by group | states what comparison can and cannot support for policy inference | concede partly; narrow the claim if needed |
| Causal or selection concern | robustness, falsification, decomposition, or scope condition | separates development meaning from causal overreach | add evidence where feasible; soften verbs where not |
| Synthetic essay lacks contribution | framework boundary, typology, or mechanism clarified | policy/development stakes and cases made explicit | rewrite framing, not only add citations |
| Reviewer asks for too much expansion | explains why the requested population analysis would break focus | explains why the development claim remains bounded without it | respectful pushback plus future-work note |
For each row, assign: concede, concede partly, rebut, or defer, and name the manuscript
location where the change appears. No row should end with only "clarified in text" unless the issue is
purely expository.
Show full SKILL.md (284 more words)Show less
Conflict-resolution note to the editor
When reviewers pull in different directions, write the tradeoff explicitly in the cover note instead of hiding it inside point-by-point responses.
R1 requested a finer age-specific decomposition, while R2 asked us to foreground the cross-national
development implication. We added the decomposition as Appendix Table A3 and use the main text to
state the policy interpretation more narrowly. This preserves the demographic logic without widening
the development claim beyond the evidence.Use this pattern whenever one request would make the paper longer, narrower, more technical, or less development-facing than another request. The editor should see that the revision is convergent.
Claim-change control
Every new analysis should be tied to a claim decision.
| New material | Claim decision |
|---|---|
| Robustness confirms the original result | keep claim, add precision and uncertainty |
| Robustness weakens magnitude but keeps direction | narrow magnitude language and update abstract/discussion |
| Alternative denominator changes interpretation | revise the population mechanism, not just a footnote |
| Development implication no longer follows | move claim to scope condition or future research |
| Reviewer-requested expansion is infeasible | explain why, add the nearest feasible check, and avoid pretending it was done |
After revisions, re-read the abstract, introduction, conclusion, tables, and response letter together. They must tell the same story about what changed.
Response-letter format
For each reviewer comment:
> [Quoted reviewer comment]
Response: [What we did / why we respectfully disagree, on demographic or development grounds].
Change: [Section/page/table-figure number where the revision appears].Open with a short summary of the main changes to the editor; group by reviewer; end each entry with the location of every change so the editor and referees can verify quickly.
Anti-patterns
- Ignoring or merging away a comment without a visible response
- Capitulating to a request that breaks the demographic logic (e.g., a wrong denominator change) or the development argument just to please a reviewer
- Defensive or dismissive tone toward expert cross-field reviewers
- "We thank the reviewer" with no actual change or argued reason
- Satisfying the demographer while ignoring the development referee (or vice versa)
- Letting the revised manuscript or new exhibits drift out of sync with the deposited materials
Output format
【Editor decisive points】addressed first? [list]
【Coverage】every reviewer comment answered? [Y/N]
【Concede vs rebut】each tagged with demographic/development evidence + change location
【Cross-field conflicts】reconciled and explained to editor? [Y/N]
【Contribution protected】no dilution of the population-and-development claim? [Y/N]
【Claim changes】kept / narrowed / reframed / deferred, with locations
【Materials sync】new exhibits reflected in DAS, appendix, and reproducibility files? [Y/N]
【Anonymity + APA formatting + materials updated】[Y/N]
【Next】resubmit via ScholarOneSupplementary resources
../../resources/official-source-map.md— review-process, double-anonymized, and revision policy
© 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 Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal of brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills.
Open the folder on GitHubat commit 932eb23
Compare with similar skills
Popdevr Rebuttal 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Popdevr Rebuttal this skillbrycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills | 1.2k | — | ~2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Peer Reviewspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 17 repos | ~5.9k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT | |
| Scholar Evaluationspacering-net/codeg | 3.9k | 11 repos | ~3.2k | Automated safety check: Pass | MIT | |
| Academic Paper Writing PipelineImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~16k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Academic Paper ReviewerImbad0202/academic-research-skills | 51k | — | ~11k | Automated safety check: Pass | Custom licence | |
| Peer ReviewK-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer | 2.4k | 2 repos | ~3.1k | Automated safety check: Notes | MIT |
Similar skills
Scholar Evaluation
spacering-net/codeg
Systematically evaluate scholarly work using the ScholarEval framework, providing structured assessment across research quality dimensions including problem formulation, methodology, analysis, and…
Academic Paper Writing Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Runs a 12-agent pipeline that plans, drafts, cites, reviews and formats academic papers, with modes for revision, rebuttals, abstracts and citation checks.
Academic Paper Reviewer
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Simulates a journal peer review of a manuscript with a five-seat reviewer panel, an editorial synthesizer and several review modes.
Peer Review
K-Dense-AI/claude-scientific-writer
Prepare evidence-bounded, constructive peer-review drafts and structured manuscript assessments.
Academic Research Pipeline
Imbad0202/academic-research-skills
Orchestrates a ten-stage academic workflow from research to finished manuscript, including integrity checks, two rounds of peer review and revision.
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 Popdevr Rebuttal
What does Popdevr Rebuttal do?
A skill your agent uses when writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit. Popdevr Rebuttal is an agent skill from brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills. Use when writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit.
When should I use Popdevr Rebuttal?
Popdevr Rebuttal fits situations like: writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR; wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit.
How do I install Popdevr Rebuttal in Claude Code?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill popdevr-rebuttal -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .claude/skills/popdevr-rebuttal in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.
How do I install Popdevr Rebuttal in Codex?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill popdevr-rebuttal -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (Population-and-Development-Review-Skills/skills/popdevr-rebuttal in brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) into .agents/skills/popdevr-rebuttal in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.
Can I use Popdevr Rebuttal 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 popdevr-rebuttal -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/popdevr-rebuttal, .gemini/skills/popdevr-rebuttal, .github/skills/popdevr-rebuttal and .opencode/skills/popdevr-rebuttal in your project.
What does Popdevr Rebuttal need to run?
SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Popdevr Rebuttal is instructions for the agent only.
Does Popdevr Rebuttal 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 Popdevr Rebuttal 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 Popdevr Rebuttal use?
Popdevr Rebuttal 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 Popdevr Rebuttal use?
About 2k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 8.2k 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 Popdevr Rebuttal?
Skills that share tags, products or a category with Popdevr Rebuttal: Peer Review (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Scholar Evaluation (spacering-net/codeg, 3.9k stars), Academic Paper Writing Pipeline (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars) and Academic Paper Reviewer (Imbad0202/academic-research-skills, 51k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.
Who maintains Popdevr Rebuttal?
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.