scholar-rebuttal-pro

Parse reviewer feedback and generate structured academic rebuttal documents.

76|5|Updated Jul 7, 2026

Search Tags:#academic writing #peer review #conference submission #rebuttal #review response #paper revision

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/catlog22/pi-maestro-flow --skill scholar-rebuttal-pro

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: scholar-rebuttal-pro
Source: https://github.com/catlog22/pi-maestro-flow/tree/main/.pi/skills/scholar-rebuttal-pro
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/catlog22/pi-maestro-flow --skill scholar-rebuttal-pro

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill helps researchers respond to peer review efficiently by turning raw reviewer comments into a structured, evidence-backed rebuttal plan and final reply document.

Core Features & Use Cases

Review parsing and classification: Organizes reviewer feedback into major, minor, misunderstanding, and typo-level issues.
Multi-perspective strategy development: Simulates author, reviewer, and expert viewpoints to shape stronger responses.
Evidence-guided rebuttal writing: Maps each comment to an Accept, Defend, Clarify, or Experiment response with supporting paper evidence and conference-specific tone.
Quality validation: Checks completeness, professionalism, persuasiveness, and evidence strength before submission.

Quick Start

Use the scholar-rebuttal-pro skill to transform these reviewer comments into a conference-ready rebuttal for my paper and suggest any evidence or experiments I should add.

Frequently Asked Questions about scholar-rebuttal-pro

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

FAQPage Schema

How do I write a rebuttal for peer review comments?▼

To write a peer review rebuttal, parse reviewer feedback into major, minor, and misunderstanding categories, then map each comment to an Accept, Defend, Clarify, or Experiment response with supporting evidence and a conference-specific tone.

What is the best way to structure a conference rebuttal for an ML paper?▼

The best way to structure a conference rebuttal for an ML paper is to classify reviewer issues by severity, apply multi-perspective strategy development simulating author and reviewer viewpoints, and validate persuasiveness and evidence strength before submission.

How do I respond to reviewer comments asking for new experiments?▼

To respond to reviewer comments asking for new experiments, map the request to an Experiment response strategy, identify supporting paper evidence, and generate a targeted reply document that addresses the specific experimental gaps.

Can I use an automated rebuttal workflow for general research conferences?▼

Yes, you can use an automated rebuttal workflow for general research conferences. The process applies to ML, CV, NLP, and general research submissions by selecting conference-specific templates and validating the tone and completeness of your review response.

How do I check if my review response addresses all reviewer concerns?▼

You check if your review response addresses all reviewer concerns by running a quality validation step that evaluates completeness, professionalism, persuasiveness, and evidence strength to ensure no feedback points are missed.

What should I do when a reviewer misunderstands my paper's contribution?▼

When a reviewer misunderstands your paper's contribution, classify the feedback as a misunderstanding issue, apply a Clarify response strategy, and use multi-perspective analysis to shape a persuasive, evidence-backed explanation.