# Referee Response

> Draft or revise a response to an exact scientific referee comment using the current manuscript and already established evidence, and map promised manuscript changes. Use when response-to-reviewers prose is the direct deliverable. It consumes rather than decides contested scientific validity; do not use for ordinary manuscript editing or general journal correspondence.

- Skill: `agentic-tend/referee-response` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 4 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add agentic-tend/referee-response`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/agentic-tend/referee-response/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- License: MIT. Adapted from texra-ai; see LICENSE.txt.
- Author: agentic-tend (https://skillmd.com/u/agentic-tend)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/agentic-tend/referee-response

---


# Referee Response

Answer the objection that was actually raised, using scientific conclusions already established from controlling evidence.

## Establish the response contract

1. Read the exact referee comment and identify its direct objection, requested evidence or change, and any separate journal-positioning judgment.
2. Inspect the current response draft and manuscript locations that the answer depends on. Do not treat a planned revision or stale draft as current source state.
3. If support for a substantive response statement remains disputed, compose `$scientific-claim-audit` before drafting. This skill consumes scientific judgments; it does not establish them by rhetoric.
4. For a physics-journal response, read [physics-journal response practice](references/physics-journal-practice.md) and apply any more specific editor or journal instructions from the current decision.

## Build the answer

- Select the response move that matches the evidence: acknowledge, correct, clarify, provide validation, state a bounded contribution, or leave an unresolved author choice visible.
- Lead with the direct answer. Attach each supporting block to the exact objection and the evidence needed to resolve it.
- Distinguish validation evidence from contribution claims and scientific claims from journal-positioning arguments.
- Map every promised revision to an exact manuscript target. Use past-tense revision language only after the same bounded statement appears in the current source.

## Preserve scope and delivery ownership

- The scoped objection and established evidence determine the response and revision map. The map routes new calculations, manuscript edits, submission actions, and external correspondence to their authorized workflows.
- When revisions are authorized, synchronize the response and every affected manuscript claim surface. Compilation verifies the artifact; controlling scientific evidence supports the statement.
- Compose `$structure-documentation` for the response's reading path and professional prose. Route LaTeX, comments, compilation, rendering, and tracked-change mechanics through the repository's build instructions and current artifact tools.
- Stop when the scoped objection has a direct evidence-backed answer, each promised revision matches current source, and any unresolved choice is explicit.