light-review-rebuttal
Build auditable peer-review revision and author-response packages for Light stage 13. Use after receiving reviewer comments, a decision or meta-review; when drafting a rebuttal or response letter; when triaging major/minor revisions; when simulating a pre-submission review; or when a rejection may require a user-chosen 13→3 novelty, 13→5 experiment, or 13→8 writing back-edge. Consumes the selected venue/context and real PDF facts, preserves reviewer wording, atomizes issues, binds claims/evidence/actions/provenance, separates PLANNED from DONE, checks current venue limits without borrowing ano
npx skills add Light0305/Light-skills --skill light-review-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.
# Review and rebuttal Build a source-preserving review registry, issue matrix, revision plan, evidence/change map, response draft, commitment ledger, unknown/failure record, and delivery package. Treat prose generation as the last layer, not the first. Read [`review-rebuttal-resource-map.md`](review-rebuttal-resource-map.md) before a real run. Read [`references/workflow_contract.md`](references/workflow_contract.md) before creating or consuming canonical JSON. Read [`references.md`](references.md) when selecting review/rule sources. The competitor evidence is [`../../docs/competitors/review-rebuttal.md`](../../docs/competitors/review-rebuttal.md). ## Non-negotiable boundaries 1. Consume venue-matching's selected handoff and review context. Verify selected identity, `selected_at` timezone, `selection_basis`, user/delegated authorization, chosen candidate ID, fit/risk row, unmodified rule envelopes, source evidence path/as-of/source IDs, manuscript profile, and PDF path/hash/pages/page size/profile/compliance. Never switch venue, reorder tiers, or turn venue `UNKNOWN` into a fact. 2. Keep reviewer, editor, decision, and meta-review text verbatim in the canonical registry. Atom labels
- Non-negotiable boundaries
- Canonical workflow
- 1. Verify upstream identity
- 2. Capture reviews and decisions
- 3. Atomize without erasing source
- 4. Bind issues to owned evidence and actions
- 5. Budget from the selected venue only
- 6. Check commitment truth
- 7. Gate and pause
- Resource ownership
- Self-check
- Honest capability boundary
python scripts/review_workflow.py \ python scripts/fetch_openreview.py \ python scripts/review_response_contract.py \ python scripts/rebuttal_budget.py \ review-delivery/response-draft.md \ python scripts/experiment_request_gate.py \ python scripts/check_commitments.py \ python scripts/reviewer_classify.py \ python ../light-orchestrator/scripts/run_checkpoint.py \ python ../light-orchestrator/scripts/reroute.py \
What does the light-review-rebuttal skill do?
Build auditable peer-review revision and author-response packages for Light stage 13. Use after receiving reviewer comments, a decision or meta-review; when drafting a rebuttal or response letter; when triaging major/minor revisions; when simulating a pre-submission review; or when a rejection may require a user-chosen 13→3 novelty, 13→5 experiment, or 13→8 writing back-edge. Consumes the selected venue/context and real PDF facts, preserves reviewer wording, atomizes issues, binds claims/evidence/actions/provenance, separates PLANNED from DONE, checks current venue limits without borrowing ano
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add Light0305/Light-skills --skill light-review-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 Light0305/Light-skills, a repository with 505 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.