Individual skill

prl-referee-strategy

Use when choosing suggested and opposed referees for a Physical Review Letters submission and pre-empting the objections APS referees are likely to raise. Plans referee handling; does not write the manuscript or the rebuttal.

Physical-Review-Letters-Skills/skills/prl-referee-strategy/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)
1,397
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

# PRL Referee Strategy (prl-referee-strategy)

## When to trigger

- The submission form asks for suggested / opposed referees
- You want to anticipate the objections a PRL referee will raise and address them in advance
- A prior Letter was bounced and you are rethinking who reviews it
- You are coordinating the cover-letter referee section (see `prl-cover-letter`)

## How PRL review works (durable shape)

PRL is **selective**. APS editors triage on importance + breadth, then send promising Letters to referees (commonly two or more). A referee can recommend rejection on **importance/breadth grounds even when the work is correct** — so your strategy must defend both the science *and* the venue fit. There are defined resubmission and appeal routes if you disagree (handled in `prl-revision`).

## Choosing suggested referees
Back to top