On the difficulties in reviewing academic software papers in the earth sciences: a helpful checklist

A checklist that reviewers can use when peer-reviewing academic papers that introduce new software. I'm sharing this checklist with three goals: - it might help others when reviewing (or writing) papers about research software. - Sharing this checklist also helps in expectation management: by referring to this checklist reviewers can clearly indicate what they did. - By adopting this checklist as (part of their) reviewers guidelines journals communicate clearly to other scientists, but also to science-journalists and to society at large, what it means for a piece of software to be 'peer-reviewed'.