Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› rt-response-to-referees
rt-response-to-referees
GitHub用于处理审稿人修改意见（R&R），生成逐点回复信及修订计划。先回应编辑，再分类处理每位审稿人意见，确保实证性修改通过执行桥接器重新运行验证，最后按指定格式输出回复信及变更摘要。
Trigger Scenarios
收到审稿人修改意见（R&R）
需要将模拟审稿输出转换为排练回复
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill rt-response-to-referees -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "rt-response-to-referees",
"description": "Use after an R&R (or the simulated rehearsal) to turn a referee report into a point-by-point response letter plus a revision plan — editor first, every comment answered, each empirical fix backed by a real re-run via the target pack's skill and the execution bridge. Defers the venue's response format to the pack + source-map."
}
Response-to-Referees (rt-response-to-referees)
Draft the reply that decides the second round. Full method:
shared-resources/submission-readiness/response-to-referees.md.
When to trigger
- An R&R letter has arrived and needs a point-by-point response + revision.
- You want to convert
rt-simulated-refereeoutput into a rehearsed reply.
What it does
- Inventory every comment (per referee + AE), tag major/minor, substantive/clarification.
- Editor first — lead with the AE's decisive concerns.
- Classify each response honestly: concede & fix / address partially / push back with evidence (rarely, and only when right).
- Back substantive fixes with a real re-run — map each empirical comment to the pack
skill +
rt-execution-bridge; the number in the reply must be one you actually computed. - Write the letter — quote each comment, respond beneath it, point to the exact change.
- Summarize the changes in a scannable table.
Hard rules
- Editor first, then referees.
- Every claimed fix corresponds to a real change/re-run; empirical claims cite a number produced via the execution bridge.
- Answer every comment — none silently dropped.
- Venue response format from the pack + source-map (some cap length / want a structure).
- It drafts a reply; the author owns final scientific sign-off.
Output format
【Cover note to editor】how the decisive concerns were addressed
【Referee 1】R1.1 (quote) → concede&fix / partial / push-back · what changed · where · new number
【Referee 2】… 【AE】(decisive points first)
【Summary of changes】comment → change → location
【Open/declined】comments not fully addressed, with the honest reason
Anti-patterns
- Silent omission; defensive tone / blanket push-back; "we addressed this" with no real edit; burying the AE's load-bearing concern.
Next: regenerate affected outputs in rt-replication-package so the package matches the revision.
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 14:19
