mind-review-process
Use to understand how Mind evaluates a submission — triple-anonymous peer review, quality as the sole criterion, the role of expert referees, and what it means for a journal that receives over 800 submissions a year. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill mind-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.
# Review Process (mind-review-process) Knowing how Mind screens and decides lets you pre-empt the failure modes before submitting. Mind runs a **triple-anonymous** process, takes **quality as the sole criterion**, and receives **over 800 submissions a year** judged by expert referees. The selection is severe; the paper must be decisive on its own terms. ## When to trigger - Before submitting, to stress-test against the way Mind judges papers - Interpreting a decision letter and setting realistic expectations - Understanding why anonymization is non-negotiable here - Deciding whether your piece is competitive at a high-rejection venue ## How Mind review works 1. **Triple-anonymous.** Author identity is **not revealed to editors or referees** unless and until the paper is accepted. This is stronger than ordinary double-anonymous review — neither the handling editor nor the referees know who you are. Prepare the manuscript accordingly (see `mind-submission`). 2. **Preparation is a gate.** Papers **not prepared for anonymous refereeing will not be read** — revealing acknowledgements and self-identifying references must be removed. 3. **Expert referees.** Editors seek advice from a larg
- When to trigger
- How Mind review works
- Shape the paper to pass
- Anti-patterns
- Review-risk pass for Mind
- Output format
- Supplementary resources
What does the mind-review-process skill do?
Use to understand how Mind evaluates a submission — triple-anonymous peer review, quality as the sole criterion, the role of expert referees, and what it means for a journal that receives over 800 submissions a year. Sets expectations and shapes the paper to survive review; it does not contact editors.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill mind-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.