Use when an American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics (AEJ: Macro) decision letter has arrived (R&R or reject-with-comments) and you need a response-letter strategy and revision plan. Plans the rebuttal and revision; it does not run new identification, model, or robustness work itself (route to those skills).
SkillScore95Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/15/2026
What it changes
Passed 20 of 21 test cases with the skill, and 17 of 21 without it.
Without skill82%
With skill95%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Prioritizes the coeditor's preference for a linear model over Referee 1's request
Applies the same structured triage and exhibit-backed rebuttal workflow as an R&R
Requires explicit disclosure of any baseline numerical point estimate changes caused by revisions
and 3 more in the full report
4 fixed17 passed either way0 still failing1 broke
Pass-rate lift
+14 pp
Tokens
+28%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-22%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/15/2026v121 of 22 cases passed with skill · 21 comparable
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 3 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 3
Prompt
We received an R&R on our search-and-matching labor paper. Please run the full audit checklist on our rebuttal draft and structure the final response according to standard guidelines.
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Requires mapping all empirical or model objections to specific new or modified table or figure exhibits
Missed
Passed
Requires explicit disclosure of any baseline numerical point estimate changes caused by revisions
Missed
Passed
case-10 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/15/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md69 linessingle file
Rebuttal & Response Letter (aejmac-rebuttal)
When to trigger
An R&R from the editor/coeditor and referees has arrived
A reject-with-comments where a re-submission (here or elsewhere) is being weighed
Referee reports conflict with each other and you must reconcile them
You need to convert a pile of macro objections into a tractable revision plan
The AEJ: Macro rebuttal posture
AEJ: Macro review is single-blind and editor/coeditor-managed; the coeditor's letter is the binding instruction set — when a referee and the coeditor disagree, follow the coeditor. The response must show that the broad-interest macro contribution survived the scrutiny and that the identified-empirical and/or quantitative-model objections are answered with new exhibits, not new prose alone. Macro referees reward a response that re-runs the decisive check and reports the (possibly changed) number honestly.
Building the response
Step 1 — Triage every comment
Build a table: comment → required action → owning skill → main-text vs. appendix → status.
Tag each as (a) do and show, (b) do and report even if it weakens the result, or (c) reasoned pushback. Most should be (a)/(b); reserve (c) for the few you can win on the merits.
Step 2 — Map comments to the macro skills
Identification objections → aejmac-identification (re-do the SVAR/LP/narrative defense).
"Artifact of the sample/spec" → aejmac-robustness (sample splits, method cross-check).
Open with a short summary of the main changes and the headline (state if the number moved).
One comment, one response block: restate the comment, state what you did, point to the exact new table/figure/section, quote the changed text.
Be honest about movement: if a robustness check changed the estimate, report the new value and explain why the conclusion still holds (or how it is now appropriately qualified).
Push back sparingly and with evidence, never with attitude; concede gracefully where the referee is right.
Step 4 — Reconcile conflicts
When referees conflict, say so explicitly, explain your choice, and tie it to the coeditor's guidance.
Checklist
Every comment in a triage table with action, owning skill, location, status
The coeditor's letter treated as binding; conflicts reconciled to it
Each empirical/model objection answered with a new exhibit, not prose alone
Use when responding to a Revise & Resubmit decision from AER, AER:Insights, or an AEJ, and a point-by-point response letter plus aligned manuscript revisions are needed. Handles triage, the concede / clarify / push-back decision, and the response-letter format that editors actually read.