rebuttal-writing

Included with Lifetime

$97 forever

Write point-by-point rebuttals to reviewer comments. Extract concerns from reviews, generate evidence-based responses, and format as a structured rebuttal document. Use after receiving peer review feedback.

Writing & Docs

What this skill does


# Rebuttal Writing

Generate structured, evidence-based rebuttals to peer review comments.

## Input

- `$0` — Reviewer comments (text file, or pasted directly)
- Optional: current paper draft for reference

## References

- Rebuttal prompts and format templates: `~/.claude/skills/rebuttal-writing/references/rebuttal-prompts.md`

## Workflow

### Step 1: Parse Review Comments
For each reviewer:
1. Extract individual concerns/questions/weaknesses
2. Categorize each: major concern, minor concern, question, suggestion
3. Identify the core issue behind each concern

### Step 2: Generate Responses
For each concern:
1. **Acknowledge** the reviewer's point
2. **Respond with evidence** — cite specific sections, equations, experiments, or results from the paper
3. **Describe what was done** (not what will be done) — "We have added...", "Our experiments show..."
4. If additional experiments are needed, describe the new results concretely

### Step 3: Format Rebuttal
Use the standard rebuttal format:

```
# Response to Reviewers

We thank all reviewers for their constructive feedback. We address each concern below.

## Reviewer #1

**Concern #1:** [extracted concern]
**Author Response:** [detailed response with evidence]

**Concern #2:** [extracted concern]
**Author Response:** [detailed response with evidence]

## Reviewer #2
...
```

### Step 4: Summary of Changes
Add a brief summary at the top listing all major changes made to the paper:
- New experiments added
- Sections revised
- Clarifications made

## Rules

- **Reply with what was done, not what will be done** — "We have conducted additional experiments" not "We will conduct..."
- **Be specific** — Reference exact sections, table numbers, equation numbers
- **Be respectful** — Thank reviewers, acknowledge valid concerns
- **Address every concern** — Do not skip any reviewer point
- **Provide evidence** — Every response should include concrete data, citations, or reasoning
- **Keep responses concise** — Detailed enough to address the concern, but not padded
- **Highlight changes** — When referring to modified text, use blue text or clearly mark revisions

## Related Skills
- Upstream: [self-review](../self-review/), [paper-revision](../paper-revision/)
- Downstream: [paper-compilation](../paper-compilation/)
- See also: [data-analysis](../data-analysis/)

Files: 2

Size: 7.3 KB

Complexity: 25/100

Category: Writing & Docs

Source: https://github.com/lingzhi227/agent-research-skills/tree/main/skills/rebuttal-writing

Related in Writing & Docs

jax-development

Included

Use this skill when the user is writing, debugging, profiling, refactoring, reviewing, benchmarking, parallelising, exporting, or explaining JAX code, or when they mention JAX, jax.numpy, jit, grad, value_and_grad, vmap, scan, lax, random keys, pytrees, jax.Array, sharding, Mesh, PartitionSpec, NamedSharding, pmap, shard_map, Pallas, XLA, StableHLO, checkify, profiler, or the JAX repo. It helps turn NumPy or PyTorch-style code into pure functional JAX, fix tracer/control-flow/shape/PRNG bugs, remove recompiles and host-device syncs, choose transforms and sharding strategies, inspect jaxpr/lowering/IR, and benchmark compiled code correctly.

Writing & Docsscripts

nature-article-writer

Included

Drafts, rewrites, diagnostically critiques, and style-calibrates primary research manuscripts for Nature and Nature Portfolio journals. Use when the user wants a Nature-style title, summary paragraph or abstract, introduction, results, discussion, methods, figure legends, presubmission enquiry, cover letter, reviewer response, or when a scientific draft sounds generic, jargon-heavy, structurally weak, or AI-ish and needs precise, broad-reader-friendly prose without inventing data, analyses, or references. Best for primary research articles and letters rather than reviews or press releases unless explicitly adapting one.

Writing & Docsscripts

deckrd

Included

Document-driven framework that derives requirements, specifications, implementation plans, and executable tasks from goals through structured AI dialogue. Use when user says "write requirements", "create spec", "plan implementation", "derive tasks", "structure this feature", "break down into tasks", or "document this module". Also use for reverse engineering existing code into docs (/deckrd rev). Do NOT use for direct code writing — use /deckrd-coder after tasks are generated. Do NOT use when the user only wants to run or fix existing code without planning.

Writing & Docsscripts

clinical-decision-support

Included

Generate professional clinical decision support (CDS) documents for pharmaceutical and clinical research settings, including patient cohort analyses (biomarker-stratified with outcomes) and treatment recommendation reports (evidence-based guidelines with decision algorithms). Supports GRADE evidence grading, statistical analysis (hazard ratios, survival curves, waterfall plots), biomarker integration, and regulatory compliance. Outputs publication-ready LaTeX/PDF format optimized for drug development, clinical research, and evidence synthesis.

Writing & Docsscripts

handling-sf-data

Included

Salesforce data operations with 130-point scoring. Use this skill to create, update, delete, bulk import/export, generate test data, and clean up org records using sf CLI and anonymous Apex. TRIGGER when: user creates test data, performs bulk import/export, uses sf data CLI commands, needs data factory patterns for Apex tests, or needs to seed/clean records in a Salesforce org. DO NOT TRIGGER when: SOQL query writing only (use querying-soql), Apex test execution (use running-apex-tests), or metadata deployment (use deploying-metadata).

Writing & Docsscripts

accelint-ac-to-playwright

Included

Convert and validate acceptance criteria for Playwright test automation. Use when user asks to (1) review/evaluate/check if AC are ready for automation, (2) assess if AC can be converted as-is, (3) validate AC quality for Playwright, (4) turn AC into tests, (5) generate tests from acceptance criteria, (6) convert .md bullets or .feature Gherkin files to Playwright specs, (7) create test automation from requirements. Handles both bullet-style markdown and Gherkin syntax with JSON test plan generation and validation.

Writing & Docsscripts