From mgsci-skills
Drafts a point-by-point response and revision plan for a Management Science R&R, prioritizing the Department Editor's binding concerns and preserving double-anonymization.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/mgsci-skills:mgsci-rebuttalThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- You received a major-revision (R&R) decision from Management Science
In Management Science the Department Editor synthesizes the reviews and signals which concerns are binding. Plan the revision around that letter first: list every point from the DE and each reviewer, mark each binding / important / advisory, and resolve any conflicts between reviewers by deferring to the DE's framing (note the conflict explicitly in your response).
mgsci-contribution-framing) — make the decision relevance and cross-department travel explicit.The Department Editor's letter ranks concerns; treat each by type, not reviewer order.
| Concern type | Treatment in the revision |
|---|---|
| DE-flagged "binding" | Resolve fully; headline it in the summary of changes |
| Identification / proof correctness | Add the test or tighten the step; never assert |
| Cross-department fit / "so what" | Strengthen the contribution and travel case |
| Reviewer-only "advisory" | Address briefly; defer to DE on conflicts |
The DE letter calls one concern binding: a referee argues the retention effect could be a novelty bump that fades. The author leads the response with the binding fix — a pre-registered 12-week follow-up showing the effect persists at roughly 3 points (illustrative) versus 4 at week 4 — placed in the main text, with extended tables moved to the online appendix to protect the page cap. A second referee wanted alternative clustering; the author adds it as a robustness column rather than asserting the original was fine. Each response quotes the comment, states the change, and gives section and exhibit. The structure (binding first, evidence not assertion, appendix offload) is the point.
【DE binding concerns】[ranked]
【Per-comment plan】comment → change → location (section/page/exhibit)
【Lane fixes】proofs/assumptions OR identification/robustness added
【Fit/contribution】strengthened: yes/no
【Constraints】anonymized; within page cap; disclosure package updated: yes/no
【Next step】resubmit via ScholarOne (mgsci-submission for portal mechanics)
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin mgsci-skillsPlans an M&SOM revision around DE/AE priorities and drafts a point-by-point response letter preserving operations centrality and the 32-page cap.
Drafts the point-by-point response letter for a Journal of Management R&R, handling reviewer conflicts, editor-first strategy, and 50-page limit compliance.
Drafts a point-by-point response letter after a Production and Operations Management (POM) revise-and-resubmit, addressing the Department Editor and referees, splitting changes between the main paper and e-companion, and respecting the 32-page cap.