academic-reviewer

Analyze systems conference papers into HotCRP-style reviews with seven evaluation dimensions.

4|2|Updated Feb 19, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/drunkcoding/AgentSkillsArxiv --skill academic-reviewer-drunkcoding
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: academic-reviewer
Source: https://github.com/drunkcoding/AgentSkillsArxiv/tree/main/skills/academic-reviewer
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/drunkcoding/AgentSkillsArxiv --skill academic-reviewer-drunkcoding

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Structured, high-quality reviews are essential for selecting and improving systems research. This Skill provides a comprehensive framework, templates, and best-practice guidance to produce thoughtful, constructive, and policy-aligned reviews for systems conference papers.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • HotCRP-aligned evaluation fields: Overall Merit, Reviewer Confidence, Paper Summary, Strengths, Weaknesses, Detailed Comments, Questions for Authors, Minor Issues.
  • Seven-dimension assessment: Novelty, Technical Soundness, Significance, Evaluation, Presentation, Relevance, Reproducibility, with venue-specific rubrics.
  • Safety and tone guidance: constructive feedback, ethics, and reviewer conduct to improve outcomes for authors and programs.
  • Multi-perspective generation: supports simulating expert, knowledgeable, familiar, and limited-knowledge reviews for diverse PC perspectives.
  • Teaching and onboarding: useful as course material or training for new reviewers to learn standard evaluation practices and write high-quality feedback.

Quick Start

Begin by loading a paper’s title and abstract, then fill in the seven HotCRP fields and the seven evaluation dimensions to generate a complete review.

Frequently Asked Questions about academic-reviewer

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I write a structured systems conference paper review for HotCRP?

Generate a HotCRP-style systems paper review by loading the title and abstract, then evaluating seven dimensions like novelty and soundness to populate fields including Overall Merit, Reviewer Confidence, Strengths, Weaknesses, and Questions for Authors.

What are the standard evaluation dimensions for NSDI or SOSP paper reviews?

The standard evaluation dimensions for NSDI or SOSP paper reviews include novelty, technical soundness, significance, evaluation, presentation, relevance, and reproducibility, assessed using venue-specific rubrics.

How do I simulate different program committee perspectives when reviewing systems research?

You can simulate different program committee perspectives by generating reviews that model varying expertise levels, including expert, knowledgeable, familiar, and limited-knowledge standpoints, ensuring diverse PC viewpoints.

Can I use academic-reviewer to train new reviewers for systems conferences?

Yes, you can use this framework to train new reviewers for systems conferences by leveraging it as onboarding material to teach standard evaluation practices, reviewer conduct, and how to write high-quality, constructive feedback.

What should be included in a HotCRP assessment for a systems paper?

A complete HotCRP assessment for a systems paper should include Overall Merit, Reviewer Confidence, Paper Summary, Strengths, Weaknesses, Detailed Comments, Questions for Authors, and Minor Issues.