issta-review-process
Use when explaining or planning around ISSTA peer review, covering double-anonymous reviewing, at least three PC reviews, the Accept/Major-Revision/Reject outcome model, the phase-two major-revision resubmission, the named evaluation criteria, how the decision is actually synthesized, and how earlier editions ran multiple rolling deadlines.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill issta-review-process --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.
# ISSTA Review Process Use this to reason about review-stage strategy. ISSTA review is double-anonymous and its outcome model is richer than accept/reject, so plan around the Major-Revision path from the start. Reopen the current call and dates page before making process claims — the number of deadlines and the exact mechanics change between editions. ## Process model - Reviewing is double-anonymous: reviewers do not see author identities and authors do not see reviewer identities. - Each paper receives at least three PC reviews; chairs solicit more when expertise is thin or reviewers disagree sharply. - First-round outcomes are **Accept**, **Major Revision**, or **Reject**. A Major-Revision paper revises against a fixed later deadline and receives a terminal decision — it is a real second chance, not a soft reject, and reviewers expect the revision to address their points concretely. - Earlier editions (e.g. ISSTA 2023, 2024) ran **two rolling submission deadlines**, where a first-deadline paper could be sent a major revision to the second deadline while second-deadline papers got only accept/reject. The multi-round model is genuine ISSTA history; its exact shape is cycle-specific
- Process model
- The named evaluation criteria
- Who reviews here
- Stage-by-stage realism
- Output format
What does the issta-review-process skill do?
Use when explaining or planning around ISSTA peer review, covering double-anonymous reviewing, at least three PC reviews, the Accept/Major-Revision/Reject outcome model, the phase-two major-revision resubmission, the named evaluation criteria, how the decision is actually synthesized, and how earlier editions ran multiple rolling deadlines.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill issta-review-process --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.