skills/stage1/template/SKILL.md
Base template for Stage1 reviewer-comment breakdown. Use when creating or extending conference-specific Stage1 skills (for example ICLR, ICML, NeurIPS, ACL) so shared extraction, splitting, and response-mapping logic stays consistent.
npx skillsauth add runtsang/rebuttalstudio stage1-breakdown-templateInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Use this template as the shared core for all Stage1 conference variants. Conference-specific files must apply this template first, then add only necessary overrides.
Extract conference-defined scores (numbers only)
6, 4, 3), without scale explanations.Preserve designated sections verbatim
Split issue-bearing sections into atomic issues
Create response blocks (Response1 ... ResponseN)
title: generated short subtitlesource: weakness or questionsource_id: weaknessN or questionNquoted_issue: exact verbatim text of the mapped atomic issueApply prefix and numbering rules
weaknessN.questionN.weaknessN and questionN independently.Split when any of these applies:
Do not split when sentences elaborate one single concern.
Use this structure, with conference-specific keys provided by the extension file:
# Stage1 <CONFERENCE> Breakdown
## Scores
- <score_key_1>: <number>
- <score_key_2>: <number>
## Preserved Sections
- summary: |
<verbatim text>
- strength: |
<verbatim text>
## Atomic Issues
- weakness1: "<verbatim quoted issue>"
- weakness2: "<verbatim quoted issue>"
- question1: "<verbatim quoted issue>"
## Responses
### Response1
- title: <generated subtitle>
- source: weakness
- source_id: weakness1
- quoted_issue: "<same verbatim text as weakness1>"
Before finalizing, verify:
Atomic Issues.quoted_issue is verbatim.Conference-specific Stage1 files must define:
# Stage1 <CONFERENCE> Breakdown).Do not rewrite shared logic in conference files unless a true conference-specific exception exists.
data-ai
Remove AI-generated writing patterns from rebuttal prose to make it sound natural, direct, and authentically human-authored. Use when a Stage 2 refined draft or Stage 4 follow-up response reads too formulaic, robotic, or "GPT-like". Supports academic English.
testing
Condense rebuttal prose into fewer words without changing the original meaning. Use when a response block, paragraph, or selected passage is too long but all technical content, citations, and commitments must stay intact. Supports academic English.
development
Systematic review response strategy guide for RebuttalStudio. Use when developing response strategies for reviewer comments, deciding how to classify concerns, or choosing between Accept/Defend/Clarify/Experiment approaches at any stage of the rebuttal pipeline.
testing
Systematic quality check for a completed rebuttal document before submission. Use after Stage 3 document compilation or after Stage 5 final remarks writing to verify completeness, tone, factual accuracy, and structural integrity. Catches common rebuttal errors before they reach reviewers.