CCF Rebuttal Writer
Core Rule
Handle post-review communication and revision accountability. Responses must be calm, factual, evidence-grounded, and promise only feasible changes. Resubmission adaptation is conservative by default: no new experiments and no bibliography changes unless the user explicitly authorizes them. Follow the user's requested response format: plain text, TeX, reviewer-by-reviewer, issue-grouped, table-first, or short response.
Modes
rebuttal: reviewer/AC response under a word or time budget.revision-ledger: reviewer comment -> action -> manuscript location -> owner -> status.response-letter: revision summary or camera-ready response letter.resubmission: adapt an already written paper to a new venue with conservative defaults.
Workflow
- Identify venue, response format, word budget, deadline, review scores/confidence, and whether this is rebuttal, revision, or resubmission.
- Parse comments into issue groups by reviewer, concern type, severity, available evidence, response strategy, and promised paper change.
- Load
references/response-strategy.md and ../kim-ccf-research-shared/references/prose-guardrails.md (TODO); answer high-impact concerns first: soundness, novelty, missing evidence, incorrect assumptions, and shared concerns.
- Load
references/revision-ledger.md whenever promised edits, manuscript locations, resubmission actions, review rounds, or cross-version score changes must be tracked. Update one canonical ledger in place; do not create a separate ledger per round unless the user requests snapshots.
- For full rebuttals, load
references/tex-templates.md and use the TeX templates in assets/templates/ when useful.
- For resubmission, map old reviewer concerns to the new venue's constraints through
ccf-submission-checker; do not silently add experiments or bibliography changes.
- Hand off to
ccf-paper-writer for manuscript revisions, ccf-experiment-designer for authorized new evidence, and ccf-submission-checker for venue/package checks.
Adaptive Output Contract
Put the requested response artifact first. For "write rebuttal", output the rebuttal text or TeX first. For "make a ledger", output the ledger first. Use the full structure below for standard multi-reviewer response planning or when the user asks for strategy plus draft:
Mode:
Venue and constraints:
Issue table:
Response strategy:
Draft response or response file:
Promised paper changes:
Revision ledger:
Resubmission adaptation notes:
Claims/promises to avoid:
Next CCFA owner:
Checklist status:
References
references/response-strategy.md: response tactics.references/response-checklists.md: tone, evidence, promises, and word-budget checks.../kim-ccf-research-shared/references/prose-guardrails.md (TODO): concise, non-defensive response prose and anti-pattern checks.references/tex-templates.md: reusable TeX response templates.references/revision-ledger.md: tracking reviewer comments and manuscript actions.../ccf-paper-reviewer/references/version-comparison.md: frozen scoring contract and issue provenance for cross-version review; rebuttal prose must not redefine that contract.
1---2name: kim-ccf-research-rebuttal3description: Write and organize CCF conference rebuttals, author responses, response letters, revision summaries, reviewer-comment ledgers, and conservative resubmission adaptation plans. Use for rebuttal, author response, AC/meta-review response, revision ledger, resubmission to a new venue, 审稿意见回复, 重投迁移. Do not trigger for ordinary manuscript writing.4---56# CCF Rebuttal Writer78## Core Rule910Handle post-review communication and revision accountability. Responses must be calm, factual, evidence-grounded, and promise only feasible changes. Resubmission adaptation is conservative by default: no new experiments and no bibliography changes unless the user explicitly authorizes them. Follow the user's requested response format: plain text, TeX, reviewer-by-reviewer, issue-grouped, table-first, or short response.1112## Modes1314- `rebuttal`: reviewer/AC response under a word or time budget.15- `revision-ledger`: reviewer comment -> action -> manuscript location -> owner -> status.16- `response-letter`: revision summary or camera-ready response letter.17- `resubmission`: adapt an already written paper to a new venue with conservative defaults.1819## Workflow20211. Identify venue, response format, word budget, deadline, review scores/confidence, and whether this is rebuttal, revision, or resubmission.222. Parse comments into issue groups by reviewer, concern type, severity, available evidence, response strategy, and promised paper change.233. Load `references/response-strategy.md` and `../kim-ccf-research-shared/references/prose-guardrails.md (TODO)`; answer high-impact concerns first: soundness, novelty, missing evidence, incorrect assumptions, and shared concerns.244. Load `references/revision-ledger.md` whenever promised edits, manuscript locations, resubmission actions, review rounds, or cross-version score changes must be tracked. Update one canonical ledger in place; do not create a separate ledger per round unless the user requests snapshots.255. For full rebuttals, load `references/tex-templates.md` and use the TeX templates in `assets/templates/` when useful.266. For resubmission, map old reviewer concerns to the new venue's constraints through `ccf-submission-checker`; do not silently add experiments or bibliography changes.277. Hand off to `ccf-paper-writer` for manuscript revisions, `ccf-experiment-designer` for authorized new evidence, and `ccf-submission-checker` for venue/package checks.2829## Adaptive Output Contract3031Put the requested response artifact first. For "write rebuttal", output the rebuttal text or TeX first. For "make a ledger", output the ledger first. Use the full structure below for standard multi-reviewer response planning or when the user asks for strategy plus draft:3233```text34Mode:35Venue and constraints:36Issue table:37Response strategy:38Draft response or response file:39Promised paper changes:40Revision ledger:41Resubmission adaptation notes:42Claims/promises to avoid:43Next CCFA owner:44Checklist status:45```4647## References4849- `references/response-strategy.md`: response tactics.50- `references/response-checklists.md`: tone, evidence, promises, and word-budget checks.51- `../kim-ccf-research-shared/references/prose-guardrails.md (TODO)`: concise, non-defensive response prose and anti-pattern checks.52- `references/tex-templates.md`: reusable TeX response templates.53- `references/revision-ledger.md`: tracking reviewer comments and manuscript actions.54- `../ccf-paper-reviewer/references/version-comparison.md`: frozen scoring contract and issue provenance for cross-version review; rebuttal prose must not redefine that contract.
ConmuYan