Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Structure responses to referee reports for R&R submissions
| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-23 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -24% | 0% |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -35% | 0% |
| case-19 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -26% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | -35% | 0% |
| case-12 | ✓→✗ | ▼ Worse | -40% | 0% |
Draft a structured point-by-point response to referee comments.
$ARGUMENTS — path to a file containing referee comments (e.g., notes/referee-report-R1.txt), or the word "paste" to accept inline inputindex.qmd to understand the current manuscript content, structure, and arguments.markdown Point N: Quote or paraphrase the referee's comment]
Response: Address the comment — acknowledge the concern, explain what was done or why you disagree, provide additional evidence or reasoning]
Changes made: Describe specific edits with section references, e.g., "We have added two paragraphs to Section 3 (@sec-data) clarifying the sample selection."]
markdown # Response to Referee Comments
## Referee 1
Point-by-point responses]
## Referee 2
Point-by-point responses]
## Editor
Point-by-point responses]
notes/referee-response-R<N>.md where N is the revision round number (check existing files to determine the round).index.qmd or notebooks that address the referee's concerns. Present these to the user but do NOT apply them without explicit approval.Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.