Browse reusable Agent Skills, each with a clear purpose and practical guidance.
Use when drafting ACM PODS author responses, covering the short ~48-hour double-anonymous rebuttal that corrects misreadings of proofs and definitions, and — distinctively — the shepherded revision cover letter that maps every required item to a concrete change in the resubmitted paper and survives the shepherd's second read.
Use when revising an ACM PODS paper for a precise model and result on the first page, exact theorem statements with matching bounds, complete and self-contained proofs (body plus at-submission appendix), honest assumptions and open cases, double-anonymous wording, and disciplined use of the acmsmall 15-page budget.
Use when framing the contribution of a Production and Operations Management (POM) manuscript — stating the managerial insight for practicing operations managers and the advance to OM knowledge, tied to the target Department. Frames the contribution; it does not run the analysis (pom-data-analysis) or polish prose (pom-writing-style).
Use when drafting the revision and point-by-point response after a Production and Operations Management (POM) revise-and-resubmit — addressing the Department Editor and referees, splitting changes between the main paper and the e-companion, and respecting the 32-page cap. Drafts the response after revisions; it does not interpret the decision letter (pom-review-process).
Use when revising the prose of a Production and Operations Management (POM) manuscript — front-loading the operations problem, balancing theory with practice relevance, applying author-year citations, and enforcing the 32-page cap with an e-companion split. Polishes prose; it does not build the model (pom-theory-development) or design exhibits (pom-tables-figures).
Use when positioning a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) manuscript against the population-and-development literature so it reads as a broad-interest contribution. PDR readers span demography, economics, environment, and policy, so the paper must engage both the population-science conversation and the development debate it touches. Stakes the contribution; it does not write the lit review.
Use when writing the response to a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) revise-and-resubmit. PDR review is double-anonymized and cross-field (demographers and development scholars), so the response must convert every expert reviewer on population substance and on the development meaning, without alienating the editor. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.
Use when building the argument of a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) manuscript into a population-and-development contribution — whether the work is an empirical study, a formal/conceptual model, or a synthetic essay that reorganizes a debate. PDR rewards a clear mechanism, a sharpened estimate, or a framework that travels, over a bare correlation. Structures the argument; it does not run analyses.
Use when deciding whether a project fits Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) and which article type to target. PDR sits at the intersection of demography and development, so the test is a population-change question tied to social, economic, or environmental change and policy — broad interest, not a narrow estimate. Helps frame the question; it does not collect data.
Use when drafting or polishing a Population and Development Review (PDR, Wiley / Population Council) manuscript so it reads for a broad demography-and-development audience, follows the journal's house conventions (APA-style references; Free Format first round), and fits typical length norms (Research Articles ~8,000–10,000 words). PDR prizes lucid, essayistic prose. Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.