本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

referee-response

Structure responses to referee reports for R&R submissions

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.8 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Referee Response Assistant

Help structure and draft responses to referee reports. Ensures consistent formatting and comprehensive responses.


Response Document Structure

RESPONSE TO REFEREE COMMENTS

Paper: [Title]
Authors: [Names]
Journal: [Journal Name]
Manuscript #: [Number]
Date: [Date]

We thank the editor and referees for their constructive comments.
We have carefully addressed all points raised. Below we provide
point-by-point responses. Referee comments are in italics, and
our responses follow in regular text. All page and line numbers
refer to the revised manuscript.

================================================================
RESPONSE TO EDITOR
================================================================

[Editor comments and responses]

================================================================
RESPONSE TO REFEREE 1
================================================================

[Point-by-point responses]

================================================================
RESPONSE TO REFEREE 2
================================================================

[Point-by-point responses]

Point-by-Point Response Template

For each referee comment:

----------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 1.X: [Brief label for reference]
----------------------------------------------------------------

*[Paste exact referee comment in italics]*

RESPONSE:

[Your response here]

- What we did to address the comment
- Where changes appear in the manuscript (page X, lines Y-Z)
- If we added analysis, summarize the results
- If we respectfully disagree, explain why with evidence

CHANGES MADE:
- Page X: [Description of change]
- Table Y: [Description of new/modified table]
- Section Z: [Description of new text]

Response Strategies by Comment Type

Data/Sample Questions

The referee raises an important point about [issue]. We have:
1. [Addressed concern directly]
2. Added robustness tests in Table X showing results hold when [alternative]
3. Discussed this limitation on page Y, lines Z

Identification Concerns

We appreciate this comment on identification. We address this in three ways:
1. Added [placebo test/IV/etc.] in Table X
2. Discussed the assumption more carefully in Section Y
3. Acknowledge remaining limitations on page Z

Requests for Additional Analysis

Thank you for this suggestion. We have added [analysis] in Table X / Figure Y.
The results show [brief summary]. This [strengthens/qualifies] our main findings.

Clarification Requests

We apologize for the lack of clarity. We have revised the text on page X
to clarify that [explanation]. The revised passage now reads:

"[Quote revised text]"

Disagreement (Respectful)

We appreciate this thoughtful comment. After careful consideration, we
respectfully maintain our original approach because:
1. [Reason 1 with evidence/citation]
2. [Reason 2]

However, we have added discussion of this alternative perspective on page X
and include [robustness test] in the appendix to address related concerns.

Change Tracking Summary

Include at the end of your response:

================================================================
SUMMARY OF MAJOR CHANGES
================================================================

1. Added Table X: [Description]
2. Added Figure Y: [Description]
3. Revised Section Z to [description]
4. Added robustness tests for [list]
5. Expanded discussion of [topic] on pages A-B

================================================================
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS ADDED
================================================================

- Online Appendix Table A1: [Description]
- Online Appendix Figure A1: [Description]
- Replication package updated with [additions]

Quick Commands

  • "format referee response" - Set up response document structure
  • "respond to this comment" - Draft response to a specific comment
  • "disagreement response" - Help phrase respectful disagreement
  • "summarize changes" - Generate changes summary from our edits
  • "check completeness" - Verify all comments addressed

Tone Guidelines

Do:

  • Thank referees for specific insights
  • Be concise but thorough
  • Clearly indicate where changes were made
  • Acknowledge valid limitations
  • Cite supporting evidence for your choices

Don't:

  • Be defensive or dismissive
  • Ignore parts of comments
  • Over-explain obvious points
  • Promise future work instead of doing it now
  • Leave any comment unaddressed

Common Phrases

Agreeing:

  • "We thank the referee for this excellent suggestion."
  • "This is an important point that strengthens our analysis."
  • "We have incorporated this suggestion as follows..."

Partial agreement:

  • "We appreciate this comment. While [X], we have [Y]."
  • "This is a valid concern. We address it by..."

Respectful disagreement:

  • "We thank the referee for raising this issue. After careful consideration..."
  • "We respectfully maintain our approach because..."
  • "While we see the merit in this suggestion, we believe..."

Acknowledging limitations:

  • "We acknowledge this limitation and have added discussion on page X."
  • "While ideal data would allow [X], our approach is consistent with [citations]."

Pre-Submission Checklist

Before submitting your response:

  • Every comment has a response (numbered consistently)
  • All page/line references are accurate for revised manuscript
  • New tables/figures are referenced correctly
  • Track changes document is prepared
  • Clean version of manuscript is prepared
  • Supplementary materials are updated
  • Cover letter to editor is drafted
  • Co-authors have reviewed responses

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

a1

無料

VS-Enhanced Research Question Refiner - Prevents Mode Collapse and derives differentiated research questions Enhanced VS 3-Phase process: Modal question avoidance, alternatives presentation, differentiated RQ recommendation Use when: refining research ideas, formulating research questions, clarifying scope Triggers: research question, 연구 질문, PICO, SPIDER, research idea

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

a2

無料

VS-Enhanced Theoretical Framework Architect with Critique & Visualization Full VS 5-Phase process: Modal theory avoidance, Long-tail exploration, differentiated framework presentation Absorbed A3 (Devil's Advocate) critique and A6 (Conceptual Framework Visualizer) capabilities Use when: building theoretical foundations, designing conceptual models, deriving hypotheses, critiquing frameworks, visualizing models Triggers: theoretical framework, 이론적 프레임워크, conceptual model, 개념적 모형, hypothesis derivation, critique, devil's advocate, 반론, visualization, diagram

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

a5

無料

Agent A5 - Paradigm & Worldview Advisor - Philosophical foundations for research design. Covers ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology alignment. Use when: establishing philosophical foundations, justifying methodological choices, writing positionality statements Triggers: paradigm, 패러다임, ontology, epistemology, worldview, 세계관, philosophical foundations, 철학적 기초

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Academic paper writing skill with 12-agent pipeline. v2.5: Style Calibration (learn author's writing voice from past papers) + Writing Quality Check (writing quality checklist for natural prose). Supports IMRaD, literature review, theoretical, case study, policy brief, and conference paper structures. APA 7.0 (default), Chicago, MLA, IEEE, Vancouver citation formats. Bilingual abstracts (zh-TW + EN). Multi-format output (LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, Markdown). Triggers on: write paper, academic paper, paper outline, write abstract, revise paper, check citations, convert to LaTeX, guide my paper, parse reviews, revision roadmap, 寫論文, 學術論文, 論文大綱, 寫摘要, 修改論文, 檢查引用, 引導我寫論文, 帶我規劃論文, 逐章規劃, 論文架構, 審查意見, 修訂路線圖.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5972026年10月12日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する