Menu

Individual skill

restud-rebuttal

0upvotes

Use when a referee report or R&R has arrived for a The Review of Economic Studies (REStud) manuscript and a point-by-point response letter plus aligned manuscript revisions are needed. Structures the revision and the letter; does not redo the science from scratch.

Review-of-Economic-Studies-Skills/skills/restud-rebuttal/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
Yes
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Network or broad shell
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)
1,405
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

# REStud Rebuttal (restud-rebuttal)

## When to trigger

- A decision letter with referee reports has arrived (R&R, or reject-and-resubmit)
- The user has a revised draft and needs the response letter
- The user is unsure which comments to concede, clarify, or push back on
- Multiple referees disagree and the response must reconcile them without contradiction

## REStud revision philosophy

REStud is known for **developing strong papers across rounds** with demanding referees. Treat the R&R as a collaboration, not a defense: the editor wants the paper to become publishable. The strongest response **revises the manuscript first, then writes the letter against the revised version** — never the other way around. Two REStud-specific facts to plan for: (1) review is **double-anonymous**, so address "Referee 2" by number and keep replies anonymizable; (2) acceptance is conditional on the **Data Editor's pre-publication reproducibility check** (AEA DCAS, Zenodo deposit — see `restud-replication-package`), so a revision that adds empirical results must keep the replication package in lockstep — do not promise a number you cannot regenerate from the deposit. Push new proofs and bulky robustness into the **online appendix** and point to them from the letter.

## Triage every comment
Back to top