Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research referee-response
Drafts a point-by-point response letter to referee comments with suggested edits. Use after a revise-and-resubmit.
install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/29-quarcs-lab-project20XXy/dot-claude/skills/referee-response" ~/.claude/skills/brycewang-stanford-awesome-agent-skills-for-empirical-research-referee-response && rm -rf "$T"
manifest:
skills/29-quarcs-lab-project20XXy/dot-claude/skills/referee-response/SKILL.mdsource content
Draft Referee Response
Draft a structured point-by-point response to referee comments.
Arguments
— path to a file containing referee comments (e.g.,$ARGUMENTS
), or the word "paste" to accept inline inputnotes/referee-report-R1.txt
Steps
-
Read the referee comments:
- If a file path is provided, read that file
- If "paste" is specified, ask the user to paste the comments
-
Read
to understand the current manuscript content, structure, and arguments.index.qmd -
Parse the referee comments into individual points. Each point typically starts with a number, letter, or dash.
-
For each referee point, draft a structured response:
**Point N:** [Quote or paraphrase the referee's comment] **Response:** [Address the comment — acknowledge the concern, explain what was done or why you disagree, provide additional evidence or reasoning] **Changes made:** [Describe specific edits with section references, e.g., "We have added two paragraphs to Section 3 (@sec-data) clarifying the sample selection."] -
Use appropriate response conventions:
- Thank the referee for constructive comments
- Be respectful even when disagreeing
- Distinguish between changes made and changes not made (with justification)
- Reference specific sections, tables, and figures in the manuscript
- If a comment requires new analysis, note what was done and where results appear
-
Organize the response by referee:
# Response to Referee Comments ## Referee 1 [Point-by-point responses] ## Referee 2 [Point-by-point responses] ## Editor [Point-by-point responses] -
Save the response letter to
where N is the revision round number (check existing files to determine the round).notes/referee-response-R<N>.md -
Generate a separate list of suggested manuscript edits — specific changes to
or notebooks that address the referee's concerns. Present these to the user but do NOT apply them without explicit approval.index.qmd -
Report the response letter file path and the list of suggested edits.
Error handling
- If the comments file does not exist, ask for the correct path.
- If the comments are too brief or ambiguous to parse into individual points, present them as-is and ask the user to help segment them.