Draft and audit Nature-family point-by-point reviewer response letters.
npx skills add https://github.com/lth0/codexSkill --skill nature-response-lth0
Please help me install this Agent Skill. Skill: nature-response Source: https://github.com/lth0/codexSkill/tree/main/skills/codex/nature-response Command: npx skills add https://github.com/lth0/codexSkill --skill nature-response-lth0
nature-response helps authors convert reviewer and editor feedback into a complete, point-by-point response package for Nature-family and high-impact journal revisions without risking fabricated evidence or unsupported claims.
Use nature-response when you paste your editor decision letter and the reviewers’ comments and tell it whether you want a draft, an audit of an existing draft, or a revision.
High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.
To draft a point-by-point rebuttal letter for a Nature-family major revision, paste your editor decision letter and reviewer comments to generate structured responses with stable IDs, evidence-safe action mapping, and explicit missing-information risk labeling.
Yes, you can use Chinese reviewer comments to generate an academic peer review response. The system accepts Chinese or English reviewer and editor notes and can append Chinese confirmation notes to ensure bilingual-aware manuscript revision workflows.
Traceability between reviewer concerns and manuscript revisions is ensured by segmenting editor instructions and reviewer comments into stable IDs like E.1 and R1.1, then assigning concrete action labels such as ACCEPT_TEXT or SOFTEN_CLAIM to map each response to exact manuscript changes.
The best way to avoid fabricated evidence when writing a manuscript revision response is to enforce evidence-safe action mapping and flag missing information with explicit risk labels like AUTHOR_INPUT_NEEDED, ensuring you never overpromise unsupported claims to the editor.
Yes, this rebuttal workflow supports revise-and-resubmit decisions. It applies to minor revisions, major revisions, and revise-and-resubmit processes by prioritizing editor instructions and structuring the response package to match specific decision-letter requirements.
To audit an existing draft of a reviewer response letter, provide your current draft alongside the editor decision letter and reviewer comments, then request an audit to check for evidence-safe action mapping, stable ID assignment, and missing-information risk labeling.
genomewalkerExtract and classify reviewer comments from academic peer review documents into structured JSON.
louzhengshuaiOrganizes reviewer feedback and plans manuscript revisions for academic rebuttals.
xjtulycGenerates a structured LaTeX exam paper from a text file.
Ricardo-VaeConvert editor instructions and reviewer comments into a point-by-point response package.
