asplos-author-response
Use when drafting an ASPLOS author response inside the short fixed window — triaging reviews into factual errors versus questions versus disagreements, budgeting for the ~800 words reviewers are expected to read, arguing only from evidence already in the submission, and positioning the paper for the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill asplos-author-response --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# ASPLOS Author Response The 2027 CFP defines the rebuttal's job narrowly: **(1) correct factual errors in the reviews, and (2) answer the questions reviewers posed.** There is no hard length cap, but reviewers are **not expected to read past 800 words** (verified 2026-07-08). Both facts should shape every drafting decision below. The 2027 windows are fixed and short — July 6-9, 2026 for the April cycle (open on this pack's check date) and December 1-4, 2026 for the September cycle. ## Hour one: triage before prose Sort every review remark into exactly one bucket: | Bucket | Definition | Response posture | |---|---|---| | **Factual error** | The review misstates what the paper says, measures, or assumes | Correct it, with a section/figure/table pointer — highest priority, CFP-sanctioned | | **Direct question** | The reviewer asked for a clarification | Answer in ≤ 3 sentences, citing where the paper already contains the material | | **Evidence dispute** | The reviewer doubts a result or baseline | Point to the existing run/ablation that addresses it; concede if none exists | | **Judgment call** | "Not novel enough", "fit is marginal" | One calm paragraph max, or zero — rebuttals ra
- Hour one: triage before prose
- The 800-word budget
- Rules of evidence
- Anticipating each decision from the response
- Team protocol for a 3-4 day window
- Sentence patterns, graded
- When reviews contradict each other
- Arming your champion
- Output format
What does the asplos-author-response skill do?
Use when drafting an ASPLOS author response inside the short fixed window — triaging reviews into factual errors versus questions versus disagreements, budgeting for the ~800 words reviewers are expected to read, arguing only from evidence already in the submission, and positioning the paper for the Accept / Major Revision / Reject decision.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill asplos-author-response --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.