Response-to-Referees (rt-response-to-referees)

Draft the reply that decides the second round. Full method: shared-resources/submission-readiness/response-to-referees.md.

When to trigger

• An R&R letter has arrived and needs a point-by-point response + revision.
• You want to convert rt-simulated-referee output into a rehearsed reply.

What it does

1. Inventory every comment (per referee + AE), tag major/minor, substantive/clarification.
2. Editor first — lead with the AE's decisive concerns.
3. Classify each response honestly: concede & fix / address partially / push back with evidence (rarely, and only when right).
4. Back substantive fixes with a real re-run — map each empirical comment to the pack skill + rt-execution-bridge; the number in the reply must be one you actually computed.
5. Write the letter — quote each comment, respond beneath it, point to the exact change.
6. Summarize the changes in a scannable table.

Hard rules

1. Editor first, then referees.
2. Every claimed fix corresponds to a real change/re-run; empirical claims cite a number produced via the execution bridge.
3. Answer every comment — none silently dropped.
4. Venue response format from the pack + source-map (some cap length / want a structure).
5. It drafts a reply; the author owns final scientific sign-off.

Output format

【Cover note to editor】how the decisive concerns were addressed
【Referee 1】R1.1 (quote) → concede&fix / partial / push-back · what changed · where · new number
【Referee 2】… 【AE】(decisive points first)
【Summary of changes】comment → change → location
【Open/declined】comments not fully addressed, with the honest reason

Anti-patterns

• Silent omission; defensive tone / blanket push-back; "we addressed this" with no real edit; burying the AE's load-bearing concern.

Next: regenerate affected outputs in rt-replication-package so the package matches the revision.