AgentSkillsCN

revision-workflow

回复同行评审意见,管理稿件修订。在撰写回复信、追踪各版本变更,或回应审稿人关切时使用此功能。与科学写作风格及人类写作技能配合良好。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: revision-workflow
description: Respond to peer review comments and manage manuscript revisions. Use when drafting response letters, tracking changes across versions, or addressing reviewer concerns. Works well with scientific-style and human-writing skills.
argument-hint: [reviewer comment or revision task]

Revision Workflow Guide

This guide covers responding to peer review and managing the revision process.

When to Use This Skill

  • Drafting response letters to reviewers
  • Organizing and tracking manuscript changes
  • Addressing specific reviewer concerns
  • Planning revision strategy

Combine with: scientific-style for appropriate hedging, human-writing for clear prose.

Response Letter Structure

Header

code
Response to Reviewers

Manuscript ID: [ID]
Title: [Title]
Authors: [Authors]

We thank the editor and reviewers for their constructive feedback.
We have carefully considered each comment and revised the manuscript
accordingly. Our point-by-point responses are below.

Page and line numbers refer to the revised manuscript with track changes.

For Each Reviewer

code
REVIEWER 1

Comment 1.1: [Quote or paraphrase the comment]

Response: [Your response]

Changes made: [Specific changes with page/line numbers, or "No changes made"]

---

Comment 1.2: [Next comment]
...

Closing

code
We believe these revisions have substantially improved the manuscript
and hope it is now suitable for publication in [Journal].

Sincerely,
[Corresponding author]

Response Strategies by Comment Type

Comment TypeStrategy
Minor correctionThank, agree, fix, cite location
Clarification requestThank, explain, add text if needed
Additional analysisAgree if feasible, explain if not, provide results
Methodological concernAddress directly, explain rationale, add detail
Interpretation disagreementAcknowledge perspective, explain reasoning, modify if warranted
Literature gapThank, add citations, discuss relevance
Impossible requestExplain why, offer alternative

Tone Guidelines

Do:

  • Thank reviewers for specific suggestions
  • Acknowledge valid concerns directly
  • Explain your reasoning clearly
  • Be professional and respectful
  • Separate agreement from action (you can agree something is unclear without agreeing with the proposed fix)

Don't:

  • Be defensive or argumentative
  • Dismiss concerns without explanation
  • Over-apologize or be obsequious
  • Make promises you can't keep
  • Ignore any comment (respond to everything)

Language Calibration

Instead ofUse
"The reviewer is wrong""We respectfully disagree because..."
"We already said this""We have clarified this point by..."
"This is beyond scope""While this is an important question, it is beyond the scope of the current study because..."
"We can't do this""Unfortunately, [reason]. As an alternative, we have..."

Handling Specific Situations

When You Agree

code
We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. We have [made change] as
recommended. See page X, lines Y-Z.

When You Partially Agree

code
We appreciate this comment. While we agree that [aspect], we believe
[other aspect] because [reasoning]. We have addressed this by [action].

When You Disagree

code
We thank the reviewer for raising this point. We respectfully disagree
because [clear reasoning with evidence]. However, we have [action to
address underlying concern] to clarify our position.

When You Cannot Comply

code
We appreciate this suggestion. Unfortunately, [specific reason why not
feasible: data not available, beyond scope, etc.]. As an alternative,
we have [what you did instead]. We have also added this as a limitation
in the Discussion (page X, lines Y-Z).

Version Management

See CHANGE_TRACKING.md for detailed guidance on:

  • File naming conventions
  • Track changes best practices
  • Creating clean vs. marked copies

Common Reviewer Concerns

See COMMON_REVIEWER_CONCERNS.md for pre-written strategies for:

  • Sample size concerns
  • Statistical issues
  • Generalizability
  • Missing controls
  • Literature gaps

Response Letter Templates

See RESPONSE_TEMPLATES.md for fill-in templates.

Revision Process Checklist

Before Starting

  • Read all reviews completely before responding
  • Identify patterns across reviewers
  • Prioritize major vs. minor concerns
  • Assess feasibility of each request
  • Plan revision strategy

During Revision

  • Address one comment at a time
  • Make changes in manuscript immediately
  • Record page/line numbers as you go
  • Keep track changes on
  • Note any substantive additions for cover letter

Before Submitting

  • Every comment has a response
  • Every "Changes made" entry has location
  • Response letter matches manuscript changes
  • Clean copy and marked copy are consistent
  • Cover letter summarizes major changes
  • All file naming follows journal guidelines

Related Files