Individual skill

aejmic-rebuttal

Use when drafting the response letter and revision plan after an American Economic Journal: Microeconomics (AEJ: Micro) R&R. Structures the reply to theory referees (correctness, generality, exposition) and editor; it does not re-derive the result (see aejmic-theory-model).

AEJ-Microeconomics-Skills/skills/aejmic-rebuttal/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,410
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# R&R Rebuttal & Response Letter (aejmic-rebuttal)

## When to trigger

- An AEJ: Micro decision letter arrived with an R&R (minor or major)
- You have referee reports and need a response-letter strategy
- A referee disputes a proof, the generality, or the framing and you must decide concede vs. defend
- You are sequencing the revision so the most important changes land first

## How to respond to theory referees

AEJ: Micro referees are subject-matter experts who **verify proofs** and judge **generality and exposition**. The response letter must be precise, respectful, and point-by-point. Three recurring axes:

- **Correctness:** a disputed proof step. Either fix it (and show the corrected argument in the letter), or demonstrate the step is valid with the missing detail. Never wave it away.
Back to top