Menu

Individual skill

issta-writing-style

0upvotes

Use when revising an ISSTA paper for a clear testing/analysis contribution, covering the threat-model-then-technique structure, the evaluation contract, a threats-to-validity section that is not boilerplate, claims scoped to the subjects tested, double-anonymous phrasing, and 18-page ACM sigconf discipline that survives specialist reviewers.

ISSTA-Skills/skills/issta-writing-style/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
Yes
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Network or broad shell
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,400
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# ISSTA Writing Style

Use this when revising the main paper. An ISSTA paper has to state, early and precisely, what
software behaviour it finds or reasons about, on what it was evaluated, and what the evidence
showed — to a reviewer who already knows the nearest tool and benchmark.

## Revision rules

- Put the contribution on the first page: the problem in a concrete testing/analysis setting, why
  existing techniques miss it, the technique, and what the evaluation showed. Name the technique;
  do not hide it behind "a novel approach."
- State the threat model or analysis scope before the technique. Reviewers judge soundness against
  the scope you set, so an unstated scope is an unbounded claim they will puncture.
- Make the evaluation a contract: subjects, baselines, metric, and statistic, declared before the
Back to top