sci-rebuttal
Use after Science reviews arrive to triage the decision, prioritize experiments, and draft a point-by-point response that is respectful, evidence-led, and honest about limits. Do not run before the main text is actually revised.
Profile →npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sci-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.
# Reviewer Rebuttal (sci-rebuttal) ## When to trigger - A decision letter arrives (reject / reject-but-resubmit / major or minor revision). - You have reviewer comments and need a strategy before writing. - A revision is drafted and you need the point-by-point response letter. ## Step 0: read the editor's letter first The **editor's** framing outranks individual reviewers. Identify: - The decision type and whether a new review round is implied. - Which concerns the editor **emphasizes** (these are load-bearing — address fully). - Any **deal-breaker** the editor names (e.g., "the central claim needs independent validation"). > A "reject but would consider a new submission" is an invitation gated on the deal-breaker. Don't treat it as a flat reject, but don't under-deliver either. ## Triage every comment into 4 buckets | Bucket | Action | |--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------| | **Do** (fair, feasible) | Make the change; show it; quote the new text/figure. | | **Do-partial** | Do what's feasible; explain the boundary with evidence. | | **Defend** (wrong/out of scope) | Push back respectfully, with data/citations — not assertion. | |
- When to trigger
- Step 0: read the editor's letter first
- Triage every comment into 4 buckets
- Prioritize the experiments
- Response-letter format
- Tone rules
- Over-claiming watch (Science-specific)
- Science-specific revision packet
- Output format
- Anti-patterns
What does the sci-rebuttal skill do?
Use after Science reviews arrive to triage the decision, prioritize experiments, and draft a point-by-point response that is respectful, evidence-led, and honest about limits. Do not run before the main text is actually revised.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill sci-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 984 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.