| name | rebuttal |
| description | Reviewer 评论流水线：分类 → 找 supporting evidence → 写 rebuttal → cross-model review → submit。3 道 safety gate：no fabrication / no overpromise / full coverage。Use when user says "rebuttal", "reviews", "reviewer 来了", "反驳", "答辩", "OpenReview comment". |
| argument-hint | [paper-dir-with-reviews] [--venue ICML] [--char-limit 5000] |
| allowed-tools | Bash(*), Read, Write, Edit, Agent, Skill, WebSearch |
/rebuttal — Reviewer-Comment Reply Pipeline
借鉴 ARIS /rebuttal。Stage 9 / acceptance loop。
Overview
5 阶段：
- Parse reviews →
paper/reviews/parsed.json（per-reviewer concerns 列表）
- Categorize 每条 concern：
factual-question / request-for-experiment / clarification / subjective-criticism
- Evidence gather 每条对应 paper/code/data 段
- Draft rebuttal 文本（按 char limit）+
/cross-review --rounds 2
- Safety gate：
- 🔒 No fabrication — 每 claim 必须 link 到 paper/code/user-confirmed result
- 🔒 No overpromise — 任何「we will add X」必须 user 批准
- 🔒 Full coverage — 每 concern 都 addressed
- Emit：
PASTE_READY.txt（精确字符数）+ REBUTTAL_DRAFT_rich.md（rich text，留 manual edit）
Workflow
VENUE=${VENUE:-ICML}
CHAR=${CHAR_LIMIT:-5000}
python3 tools/rebuttal.py parse paper/reviews/*.md > paper/reviews/parsed.json
Output
paper/reviews/parsed.jsonpaper/rebuttal/draft.mdpaper/rebuttal/PASTE_READY.txtpaper/rebuttal/REBUTTAL_DRAFT_rich.md
Composition
- 联动
/kill-argument 准备反驳武器
- 联动
/cross-review 二审
- 如有新 experiment 需求 →
/experiment-bridge (未实现，placeholder)
