ablation-planner
Use when main results pass result-to-claim (claim_supported=yes or partial) and ablation studies are needed for paper submission.
Workflow 4: Submission rebuttal pipeline. Parses external reviews, enforces coverage and grounding, drafts a safe text-only rebuttal under venue limits, and manages follow-up rounds. Use when user says \"rebuttal\", \"reply to reviewers\", \"ICML rebuttal\", \"OpenReview
$ npx -y skills add wanshuiyin/Auto-claude-code-research-in-sleep --skill rebuttal --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/rebuttalContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Workflow 4: Submission rebuttal pipeline. Parses external reviews, enforces coverage and grounding, drafts a safe text-only rebuttal under venue limits, and manages follow-up rounds. Use when user says \"rebuttal\", \"reply to reviewers\", \"ICML rebuttal\", \"OpenReview
name: rebuttal description: "Workflow 4: Submission rebuttal pipeline. Parses external reviews, enforces coverage and grounding, drafts a safe text-only rebuttal under venue limits, and manages follow-up rounds. Use when user says \"rebuttal\", \"reply to reviewers\", \"ICML rebuttal\", \"OpenReview response\", or wants to answer external reviews safely." argument-hint: "[paper-path-or-review-bundle]" allowed-tools: Bash(*), Read, Grep, Glob, Write, Edit, Skill, mcp__codex__codex, mcp__codex__codex-reply, mcp__manual_review__review, mcp__manual_review__review_reply
Prepare and maintain a grounded, venue-compliant rebuttal for: **$ARGUMENTS**
This skill is optimized for:
This skill does **not**:
If the user already has new results, derivations, or approved commitments, the skill can incorporate them as **user-confirmed evidence**.
Workflow 1: idea-discovery Workflow 1.5: experiment-bridge Workflow 2: auto-review-loop (pre-submission) Workflow 3: paper-writing Workflow 4: rebuttal (post-submission external reviews)
> Override: `/rebuttal "paper/" — venue: NeurIPS, character limit: 5000`
When calling the reviewer for stress-testing, branch on REVIEWER_BACKEND:
**If REVIEWER_BACKEND = `codex`:** Use `mcp__codex__codex` for new review threads. Use `mcp__codex__codex-reply` for follow-up rounds (reuse threadId).
**If REVIEWER_BACKEND = `manual`:** Use `mcp__manual_review__review` for new review threads with: prompt: [exact same prompt that would go to Codex] config: {"model_reasoning_effort": "xhigh", "executor_model": "<actual executor model>", "require_reviewer_model": true} Save the returned `threadId`. Use `mcp__manual_review__review_reply` for follow-up rounds with: threadId: [saved manual-review threadId] prompt: [follow-up prompt] config: {"model_reasoning_effort": "xhigh", "executor_model": "<actual executor model>", "require_reviewer_model": true}
Prompt fidelity: the manual prompt must be exactly the same text that Codex would receive. Review tracing applies equally to both backends.
1. **Paper source** — PDF, LaTeX directory, or narrative summary 2. **Raw reviews** — pasted text, markdown, or PDF with reviewer IDs 3. **Venue rules** — venue name, character/word limit, text-only or revised PDF allowed, rendering mode (one shared response or independent reviewer threads) 4. **Current stage** — initial rebuttal or follow-up round
If venue rules, limit, or rendering mode are missing, **stop and ask** before drafting.
Three hard gates — if any fails, do NOT finalize:
1. **Provenance gate** — every factual statement maps to: `paper`, `review`, `user_confirmed_result`, `user_confirmed_derivation`, or `future_work`. No source = blocked. 2. **Commitment gate** — every promise maps to: `already_done`, `approved_for_rebuttal`, or `future_work_only`. Not approved = blocked. 3. **Coverage gate** — every reviewer concern ends in: `answered`,
· · · · · · -orange?style=flat) · · 💬 Join Community · 💡 Use ARIS as a skill-based workflow in Claude Code / Codex CLI / Cursor / Trae / Antigravity / GitHub Copilot CLI / OpenClaw / DeepSeek Harness, or get the full experience with the standalone ARIS-Code
Use when main results pass result-to-claim (claim_supported=yes or partial) and ablation studies are needed for paper submission.
Quick single-paper lookup via AlphaXiv LLM-optimized summaries with tiered source fallback. Use when user says "explain this paper", "summarize paper", pastes…
Analyze ML experiment results, compute statistics, generate comparison tables and insights. Use when user says "analyze results", "compare", or needs to…
Search, download, and summarize academic papers from arXiv. Use when user says "search arxiv", "download paper", "fetch arxiv", "arxiv search", "get paper…
Autonomously improve a generated paper via GPT-6-Astra xhigh review → implement fixes → recompile, for 2 rounds. Use when user says \"改论文\", \"improve paper\",…
Autonomous research review loop using any OpenAI-compatible LLM API. Configure via llm-chat MCP server or environment variables. Trigger with "auto review loop…