Ready to supercharge your AI agents?

Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.

R&R Rebuttal (bjps-rebuttal) · brycewang-stanford | DecimalAI

researchby brycewang-stanford

R&R Rebuttal (bjps-rebuttal)

brycewang-stanford/bjps-rebuttal

Source brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills ↗License MIT

Use when writing the response to a British Journal of Political Science (BJPS) revise-and-resubmit. The response must convert each of the (usually two-plus) double-blind referees while keeping the editor confident the revision is convergent. Structures the response letter; it does not fabricate new results.

SkillScore100Maintained

Automatic

Writing & Editing pack

Last verified 8/15/2026

What it changes

Passed 22 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 18 of 22 without it.

Without skill82%

With skill100%

Checks it passed that the model alone missed

Includes the header 【Next】.
Includes the header 【Coverage】.
Includes the header 【Concede vs rebut】.

and 5 more in the full report

4 fixed18 passed either way0 still failing0 broke

Pass-rate lift: +18 pp
Tokens: +26%
Agent turns: 0%
Response time: -25%

Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/15/2026v122 of 22 cases passed with skill

Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.

Use this skill

Save it into your project's skills folder. Claude Code picks it up in its next session.

curl -fsSL --create-dirs -o .claude/skills/brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal/SKILL.md https://app.decimal.ai/s/brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal/SKILL.md

Want it pinned and updatable? pip install "decimalai>=0.15", then decimalai skills add brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal, and start Claude Code with claude --plugin-dir "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)/.agents"

1 · One-time — install the CLI (docs ↗)

pip install "decimalai>=0.15"

2 · Get the skill — writes .agents/skills/brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal/ and pins it in .decimal/skills.lock

decimalai skills add brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal

No CLI? Get the same file — curl · raw file

curl -fsSL --create-dirs -o .claude/skills/brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal/SKILL.md https://app.decimal.ai/s/brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal/SKILL.md

Raw file: /s/brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal/SKILL.md ↗ · machine-readable summary at /s/brycewang-stanford-bjps-rebuttal.json ↗

Safety checks: 3 of 3 passed

Code scan CleanIntent PassedContent Clean

See it in action

One of 4 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.

1 of 4

Prompt

I received a Revise and Resubmit decision from the British Journal of Political Science. Reviewer 1 asks for broader cross-national generalizability, while Reviewer 2 demands a deeper single-case focus. I am drafting my response letter and want you to evaluate my proposed strategy. Please structure your audit around: whether editor-flagged priorities are handled upfront, total comment coverage Y/N, clear tagging of concessions or respectful pushbacks with exact manuscript locations and evidence, explicit trade-off explanations for conflicting reviewer demands, safeguarding of the paper's main general contribution, and confirmation of double-blind compliance and updated replication package status.

What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked	Without skill	With skill
Includes the header 【Editor's decisive points】.	Missed	Passed
Includes the header 【Coverage】.	Missed	Passed
Includes the header 【Referee conflicts】.	Missed	Passed

case-01 · 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.md91 linessingle file

R&R Rebuttal (bjps-rebuttal)

A BJPS R&R is a strong signal that the paper is in contention. But the revision must satisfy the (usually two or more) referees and persuade the editor that the paper now makes its case of wide interest. The response letter must move every referee toward yes while keeping the editor confident the revision converges.

When to trigger

An R&R decision arrived and you are planning the revision + response letter
Referees disagree with each other and you must reconcile their demands
A referee requests analyses that would change the paper's claims
Writing the cover note to the editor summarizing the revision

Strategy

Read the editor's letter as the rubric. The editor signals which points are decisive. Solve those first; the editor adjudicates disagreements among referees.
One point-by-point response, every comment addressed. Quote each comment, then respond. Never skip one — silence reads as non-compliance.
Concede or rebut explicitly, with evidence. For each: did what was asked (say where, with the new text/table number), or push back respectfully with a reason (theory, design, or evidence). Editors respect a well-argued disagreement more than a hollow capitulation that weakens the paper.
Reconcile conflicting referees openly. When R1 wants the opposite of R2, say so, choose a principled path, and explain the tradeoff to the editor. Don't silently satisfy one and ignore the other.
Protect the contribution. Add robustness and clarifications; resist changes that dilute the wide-interest claim that earned the R&R. Defend scope conditions rather than over-claiming.
Keep anonymity intact in the revised manuscript (still double-blind), and update the replication package so new tables/figures remain reproducible (see bjps-transparency-and-data).

Response-letter format

For each referee comment:

> [Quoted referee comment]

Response: [What we did / why we respectfully disagree].
Change: [Section/page/table-figure number where the revision appears].

Track record

Benchmark

22 / 22

test cases passed, vs 18 / 22 without

Adoption

Users: 0
Times used: 0

Safety and source details

SkillSafety

✓ 3 of 3 passed

Code scan15 of 15 checks clean

0 critical · 0 warning · 0 info — scanner v4 — 8/3/2026

View 15 scanner checks

live_secretremote_code_executionreverse_shelldata_exfiltrationssrf_metadataagent_snoopinganti_refusaldestructive_commandsobfuscated_unicodeunicode_homoglyphopaque_blobsuspicious_urltool_overreachtrigger_abuseprompt_injection_phrasing

IntentSafe

LLM judge · does the skill do what it claims

ContentClean

LLM judge · policy & harmful-content review

Source

Imported

brycewang-stanford / awesome-journal-skills

British-Journal-of-Political-Science-Skills/skills/bjps-rebuttal/SKILL.md

View on GitHub ↗

License MITImported 8/3/2026Version v1

Other skills for the same job

Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.

More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.

Ready to supercharge your AI agents?

See it in action

What's inside

R&R Rebuttal (bjps-rebuttal)

When to trigger

Strategy

Response-letter format

Track record

Benchmark

Adoption

SkillSafety

Source

Other skills for the same job

Related skills