paper-review-reply

Generate structured point-by-point response letters for academic peer review comments.

1|Updated Apr 19, 2026

Search Tags:#writing #research #academic #journal #manuscript #peer review

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/koach08/claude-code-skills --skill paper-review-reply

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: paper-review-reply
Source: https://github.com/koach08/claude-code-skills/tree/main/skills/academic/paper-review-reply
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/koach08/claude-code-skills --skill paper-review-reply

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This skill streamlines the stressful and time-consuming process of drafting academic peer review responses, ensuring that every reviewer comment is addressed professionally and logically.

Core Features & Use Cases

Structured Response Generation: Automatically formats responses into the standard academic point-by-point structure.
Change Tracking: Helps you clearly map specific manuscript revisions to corresponding reviewer comments.
Use Case: When you receive a list of critiques from a journal editor, use this skill to draft a polite, evidence-based rebuttal that includes specific page and line references for your manuscript changes.

Quick Start

Use the paper-review-reply skill to draft a response letter based on the reviewer comments in comments.txt and the manuscript file manuscript.tex.

Frequently Asked Questions about paper-review-reply

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I write a point-by-point response letter for academic peer review?▼

To write a point-by-point response letter, you need to systematically address each peer review comment, document manuscript revisions with specific page and line references, and provide evidence-based rationale for any non-changes.

What is the standard format for a peer review rebuttal letter?▼

A standard peer review rebuttal letter formats responses point-by-point, clearly mapping specific manuscript revisions to corresponding reviewer comments while maintaining a formal academic tone and meeting journal submission requirements.

How do I structure a response to reviewer comments when I disagree with their suggestions?▼

When disagreeing with reviewer comments, structure your response by providing a clear, evidence-based rationale for non-changes, maintaining a polite and formal academic tone while logically documenting why specific revisions were not implemented.

Can I generate a journal submission response letter using my manuscript file and reviewer comments?▼

Yes, you can generate a journal submission response letter by processing your reviewer comments and manuscript file to automatically format structured, point-by-point responses that track changes and include specific page and line references.

What is the best way to track manuscript revisions against reviewer comments?▼

The best way to track manuscript revisions is to map specific manuscript changes directly to corresponding reviewer comments in a structured, point-by-point format, ensuring clear documentation of all edits and additional data included.

Does this approach work for documenting additional data requested during the peer review process?▼

Yes, this approach works for peer review by facilitating the systematic documentation and inclusion of additional data or analysis requested by reviewers, ensuring every comment is addressed with formal academic tone.