gec-revision-and-rebuttal
Use when writing the response to a Global Environmental Change (GEC) revise decision. GEC reviewers are interdisciplinary and often disagree across disciplines, so the response must convert each reviewer on their own terms without alienating the handling editor. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill gec-revision-and-rebuttal --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# Revision & Rebuttal (gec-revision-and-rebuttal) A GEC **major/minor revision** is a real opportunity, but the manuscript usually faces **reviewers from different disciplines** who may pull in opposite directions (a natural-scientist wants more data; a governance scholar wants more theory). The response letter must move *every* reviewer toward yes while keeping the handling editor confident the revision is convergent and the human-dimensions contribution is intact. ## When to trigger - A revise decision arrived and you are planning the revision + response letter - Reviewers disagree with each other (often across disciplines) and you must reconcile - A reviewer requests analyses or framing that would change the paper's claims - Writing the cover note to the editor summarizing the revision ## Strategy 1. **Read the editor's letter as the rubric.** The handling editor signals which points are decisive; solve those first. The editor adjudicates disagreements among reviewers. 2. **One point-by-point response, every comment addressed.** Quote each comment, then respond. Never skip one — silence reads as non-compliance. 3. **Concede or rebut explicitly, with evidence.** For each: did wha
- When to trigger
- Strategy
- Response-letter format
- Anti-patterns
- Output format
- Supplementary resources
What does the gec-revision-and-rebuttal skill do?
Use when writing the response to a Global Environmental Change (GEC) revise decision. GEC reviewers are interdisciplinary and often disagree across disciplines, so the response must convert each reviewer on their own terms without alienating the handling editor. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill gec-revision-and-rebuttal --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills, a repository with 909 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.