jacs-referee-strategy

npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jacs-referee-strategy --agent claude-code

Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.

# Referee Strategy (jacs-referee-strategy) ## When to trigger - You are choosing suggested and excluded reviewers for Paragon Plus - You want to anticipate and disarm objections before submission - You are stress-testing the manuscript as a skeptical referee would - A revision is coming and you want to predict reviewer concerns ## Choosing reviewers - **Suggested:** independent experts who can judge the chemistry — across the relevant subfields (e.g., a synthesis expert *and* a mechanism/spectroscopy expert for a catalysis paper). No collaborators, advisors, or same-institution. - **Breadth coverage:** because JACS is broad-scope, include at least one reviewer who can speak to the general-interest claim, not only the niche. - **Excluded:** only with a brief, professional reason (direct competitor with a conflict, prior dispute). Keep the list short and credible. ## Pre-empting the standard JACS objections Referees at JACS predictably probe rigor and significance. Address each before they raise it: | Likely objection | Pre-empt by | |------------------|-------------| | "Not broad enough for JACS" | Lead with the breadth driver; cite cross-field relevance | | "Compound X is not fully