Skill UI

This skill generates comprehensive, structured redline edits for Word documents. It captures insertions, deletions, and detailed margin comments, allowing users to conduct professional reviews (legal, copy-editing, technical). The output provides a detailed summary, top-level changes, line-by-line tracking, and clear instructions for applying revisions, ensuring the review process is systematic and actionable.

A comprehensive guide for drafting professional and strategic rebuttals for major academic conferences, such as ACM Multimedia. Learn how to triage reviewer comments, structure arguments for the Area Chair, address factual errors, and incorporate small, confirmatory results while maintaining anonymity and adhering to strict policy guardrails.

A comprehensive guide for authors responding to major journal decisions (e.g., R&R or reject-with-comments) in economics. This skill teaches a systematic approach to triaging reviewer comments, structuring the rebuttal letter point-by-point, and ensuring revisions are supported by new empirical evidence rather than just prose. It focuses on maintaining academic rigor and professional communication.

This skill acts as a workflow router, guiding researchers through the entire manuscript lifecycle for submissions to American Economic Journal: Microeconomics (AEJ: Micro). It does not write the paper, but diagnoses the current bottleneck—whether it's topic selection, model refinement, empirical testing, or rebuttal strategy—and specifies which specialized aejmic-* sub-skill to invoke next, ensuring the paper aligns with the specific requirements of AEJ: Micro. Triggered when users are unsure what step to take next, or when revising based on reviewer comments.

Provides a comprehensive strategy and format for responding to major/minor revisions in academic publishing, especially in systems science and modeling. It guides authors on how to address reviewer comments, reconcile conflicting feedback, strengthen models, and write a professional cover letter to the editor while maintaining the integrity of the core scientific contribution.

A comprehensive guide for responding to reviews and comments for the American Journal of Sociology (AJS). It structures persuasive, evidence-based rebuttal letters for Revise-and-Resubmit (R&R) stages or formal author replies to published Comments. Focuses on maintaining academic rigor, addressing conflicting points, and advancing the field's understanding through measured, theoretical engagement.

This guide helps researchers navigate and interpret the rigorous, multi-round developmental review process of the Academy of Management Review (AMR). It explains the core criteria (theoretical contribution, logical soundness) and decision signals, assisting authors in understanding editor priorities and triaging reviewer comments before drafting a response. It is a strategic guide for understanding the academic feedback process.

This guide provides a tactical framework for drafting high-stakes author responses (rebuttals) to peer reviews in top-tier academic conferences. It details how to triage reviewer comments (factual errors, questions, disputes), structure the argument within strict word limits (e.g., 800 words), and maintain a professional, evidence-based tone to maximize the paper's chances of acceptance or major revision.

This comprehensive guide teaches the methodology for crafting professional, evidence-based rebuttal letters in response to demanding peer reviews (e.g., Cell). It instructs users on triaging reviewer comments into actionable categories (Do, Defend, etc.), prioritizing necessary new experiments based on impact and feasibility, and systematically addressing the core 'completeness' gaps demanded by top-tier journals, all while maintaining a respectful and academic tone.

A highly specialized guide for drafting a rebuttal letter following a revise-and-resubmit (R&R) at top-tier economics journals. It provides a structured, point-by-point framework for professionally conceding, refuting, or upgrading evidence in response to highly technical peer reviewer comments (e.g., identification, modern DID, inference).

This skill provides a structured framework for responding to external referee reports in academic publishing. It guides authors through classifying reviewer comments, planning necessary revisions (experiments, derivations), and drafting meticulous point-by-point rebuttal letters. It emphasizes that the reply must accurately reflect actual changes made to the manuscript, ensuring professional and compliant academic communication.

A specialized tool designed to guide authors in drafting professional and structured rebuttal letters for academic journals, particularly those in Public Administration. It provides detailed templates and guidance for addressing reviewer comments, focusing specifically on strengthening theoretical frameworks and justifying methodological fits to meet high academic standards.