Agent skill · Code Review & Quality

sosp-supplementary

Use when deciding what belongs in a SOSP supplementary document versus the 12-page paper, packaging proofs, extended analyses, and methodological detail as a separate anonymized upload, and keeping review-critical evidence out of material reviewers are not obligated to read.

brycew6m878★ · +32/wk · 1 repos on radarProfile →
claude-codeMIT
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sosp-supplementary --agent claude-code

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

Facts
Files in the skill folder: 1
SKILL.md size: 5 KB
Bundled scripts: none
Path: SOSP-Skills/skills/sosp-supplementary/SKILL.md
Open the folder on GitHub →
Where it comes from
Stars: 909 · +31 this week
Language: Stata
Read our review of the source →

Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.

From the SKILL.md

# SOSP Supplementary Material Use this while splitting content between the SOSP paper and its optional supplement. The CFP (2026 cycle, checked 2026-07-08 via `sigops.org/s/conferences/sosp/2026/cfp.html` and the `sosp26.hotcrp.com` submission form) allows supplementary material as a **separate document** uploaded alongside the anonymized PDF. Its charter is narrow: content that supports the paper but is **not critical to evaluating it** — formal proofs, extra data analyses, methodological detail. Reviewers may open it; nothing obligates them to. ## The governing asymmetry The paper must stand alone inside its 12 pages of technical content. The supplement can only *deepen* an argument the paper already completes — it cannot *carry* one. This produces a simple sorting rule for every candidate paragraph, proof, and figure: | Content | Where it lives | Why | |---|---|---| | The invariant your correctness claim rests on, stated and argued | Paper | Review-critical; a reviewer who skips the supplement must still be convinced | | The full mechanized or manual proof of that invariant | Supplement | Depth behind a claim the paper already supports with a proof sketch | | Headline performanc

What's inside
Steps it walks through
  1. The governing asymmetry
  2. Anonymity extends to the supplement
  3. Supplement, artifact, and appendix are three different objects
  4. Structuring for a skimming reviewer
  5. Output format
Commands it runs
Run the same leak sweep on the supplement as on the paper
pdfinfo supplement.pdf | grep -iE '^(author|creator)'
pdftotext supplement.pdf - | grep -inE 'acknowledg|grant|@[a-z-]+\.(edu|com)|/home/[a-z]|corp\.' | head
pdftotext main.pdf - | grep -oE 'supplement[a-z]* (§|Section |Appendix )?[A-Z0-9.]*' | sort -u
More from Awesome-Journal-Skills
All skills →
About this skill
What does the sosp-supplementary skill do?

Use when deciding what belongs in a SOSP supplementary document versus the 12-page paper, packaging proofs, extended analyses, and methodological detail as a separate anonymized upload, and keeping review-critical evidence out of material reviewers are not obligated to read.

How do I install it?

Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sosp-supplementary --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.

Keep going