edbt-author-response
Use when drafting EDBT author responses across the two turns of a cycle — the short author-feedback reply on the initial reviews, and the in-cycle revise-and-resubmit change letter that maps every reviewer request to a concrete revision re-read by the original reviewers under the OpenProceedings process.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill edbt-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.
# EDBT Author Response Use this after EDBT reviews are released. An EDBT cycle has **two distinct speaking turns**, and conflating them is a common mistake: a short **author-feedback** reply on the initial reviews, and — if you receive a **revise** — a full **change letter** accompanying a revised paper that the original reviewers re-read **within the same cycle**. The revision, not the letter, carries the argument. ## Triage (both turns) - Answer what affects the decision: significance of the data-management contribution, technical soundness, evaluation fairness (real workloads, tuned baselines, realistic scale), reproducibility, and clarity. - Use evidence that already exists or that the revision will concretely add — never a vague promise. - Correct factual misreadings first; a reviewer who misread a figure or a configuration is often persuadable. - If the cycle is double-blind (**待核实** per cycle), keep every word anonymous — no tool/repository names or affiliations that reveal identity. ## Turn 1 — the author-feedback reply Short and decision-focused. One decision-critical point per reviewer beats an exhaustive reply. Concede what is true, correct what is misread, and point to
- Triage (both turns)
- Turn 1 — the author-feedback reply
- Turn 2 — the revise-and-resubmit change letter (the distinctive EDBT move)
- Reviewer pushback patterns (database-systems flavor)
- Calibration
- Output format
What does the edbt-author-response skill do?
Use when drafting EDBT author responses across the two turns of a cycle — the short author-feedback reply on the initial reviews, and the in-cycle revise-and-resubmit change letter that maps every reviewer request to a concrete revision re-read by the original reviewers under the OpenProceedings process.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill edbt-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 984 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.