rebuttal

Draft venue-compliant rebuttals from external reviewer feedback with provenance and coverage constraints.

1|Updated May 14, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/lix965996-art/MMM --skill rebuttal-lix965996-art
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: rebuttal
Source: https://github.com/lix965996-art/MMM/tree/main/resources/app/skills/rebuttal
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/lix965996-art/MMM --skill rebuttal-lix965996-art

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Rebuttal writing after external reviews is time-consuming and risky because it must address every concern using only grounded, provenance-traceable evidence while staying within strict venue character limits.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Review parsing and normalization: Loads and records raw reviewer feedback verbatim, then atomizes concerns into an issue board with reviewer, round, severity, and anchors.
  • Coverage-checked rebuttal planning: Produces a strategy plan that allocates a character budget, selects a response mode per issue, and blocks unsupported claims before drafting.
  • Grounded rebuttal drafting for text-only venues: Generates a strict paste-ready rebuttal plus an optional richer draft while enforcing provenance, commitment approvals, and full issue coverage.
  • Follow-up round support: Tracks new reviewer comments in a log and drafts delta replies with renewed safety validations.

Quick Start

Use the rebuttal skill to prepare an ICML-style text-only response to external reviews by providing your paper path or review bundle and asking for character-limited rebuttal output.

Frequently Asked Questions about rebuttal

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I draft an ICML-style text-only rebuttal under strict character limits?

To draft an ICML-style text-only rebuttal, provide raw reviewer feedback and your paper to generate a strict paste-ready response that enforces provenance, blocks unsupported claims, and stays within venue character limits.

How do I ensure full coverage of all reviewer concerns in a peer review rebuttal?

Ensure full coverage in a peer review rebuttal by atomizing raw reviews into an issue board that tracks reviewer, round, and severity, then validating that the drafted response addresses every recorded concern before output.

What is provenance enforcement in scientific writing rebuttals and why does it matter?

Provenance enforcement in scientific writing rebuttals ensures all claims are traceable to grounded evidence from the paper, preventing unsupported assertions that could undermine credibility during the peer review process.

Can I write follow-up replies for multi-reviewer threads without submitting a revised PDF?

Yes, you can draft delta replies for follow-up rounds without a revised PDF by logging new reviewer comments, generating targeted responses to the delta, and running renewed safety validations on the updated text.

What is the best way to handle multiple reviewer threads in an OpenReview rebuttal?

Handle multiple reviewer threads in an OpenReview rebuttal by parsing and normalizing each reviewer's feedback verbatim, then allocating a character budget across an issue board to produce a unified, venue-compliant response.

Why does my rebuttal planning block unsupported claims before drafting starts?

Rebuttal planning blocks unsupported claims before drafting to enforce commitment approval and provenance constraints, ensuring no unverified assertions enter the final paste-ready text under venue limits.