Browse reusable Agent Skills, each with a clear purpose and practical guidance.
Use when drafting a POPL author response during the optional multi-day window — triaging soundness objections against misread definitions, answering "what does Theorem 3 actually assume" questions with pointers rather than new material, staying concise per the CFP, and protecting the path to conditional acceptance.
Use when preparing a POPL submission for the single July HotCRP deadline — auditing the 25-pages-of-text acmsmall cap, summary-rejection format rules, full double-blind hygiene for theory papers with public proof repositories, dual-submission exposure, and the final-days upload order before the AoE cutoff.
Use when drafting or revising POPL prose — building the informal-to-formal ramp from a motivating program to definitions to a sharply stated main theorem, keeping notation coherent across 25 pages of text, writing proof sketches that name the hard case, and framing significance as an idea other PL researchers can reuse.
Use when building the theoretical argument and hypotheses of a Public Opinion Quarterly (POQ) manuscript — whether the contribution is to opinion/communication theory or to survey methodology. POQ rewards explicit constructs, mechanisms, and testable hypotheses, and methods papers need a clear claim about a survey-error source. Structures the argument; it does not run analyses.
Use when drafting or polishing a Public Opinion Quarterly (POQ) manuscript so it reads for a public-opinion and survey-methodology audience and fits the type caps (Original Article ≤ 6,500 words of text and notes; Research Note < 3,000; Polls in Context ≤ 2,500). POQ word counts cover text and notes but exclude figures, tables, references, and appendices. Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
Use when writing or auditing a PPoPP paper's related-work and positioning, covering the parallel-programming literature lanes (concurrent data structures, runtimes/schedulers, GPU/accelerators, memory models, parallel algorithms), delta-first comparison against the nearest competitor, double-blind self-citation, and separating PPoPP work from CGO/PLDI/POPL/SC neighbors.
Use when deciding what belongs in a PPoPP paper's 10 reviewed pages versus the artifact or appendix, splitting content by decision-criticality so proofs, full core sweeps, and correctness arguments that determine acceptance stay legible in the body, while bulk data and extended runs move out.
Use when drafting or tightening a PPoPP paper's prose and structure, covering the two-column acmart sigplan layout, the 10-page text+figures budget, stating the concurrency-correctness and scalability claim up front, presenting speedup curves and core sweeps, and the parallel-programming conventions PPoPP reviewers expect.
Use when shaping a proposal for a Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS) contribution — the proposal route (required for cooperative and miscellaneous pieces, optional for stand-alone), what a proposal contains, and how invited/special-issue work differs. Frames the pitch; it does not gather the literature (ppsych-literature-synthesis) or run the submission preflight (ppsych-submission).
Use when revising a Perspectives on Psychological Science (PoPS) piece for the PoPS voice — broad, provocative, accessible to psychologists outside the subfield, signposted, with a strong opening, a forward-looking close, an APA reference style, and a ≤200-word review-style abstract. Polishes prose and structure; it does not design the framework (ppsych-organizing-framework) or appraise evidence (ppsych-comprehensiveness-and-balance).