create-response-to-reviewerslisted

# /create-response-to-reviewers A revision goes back with two documents: the revised manuscript with changes marked, and a letter answering the reviewers. The letter is read by the editor and by the same reviewers who wrote the comments, and it is what decides whether the revision is accepted. Reviewers look for one thing: was every point they raised actually addressed? The process can iterate two or three times, so a response that leaves points unanswered guarantees another round. ## Before anything else 1. **Load the style rules.** Invoke `paper-writing-style`. If absent, use the condensed rules at the bottom. 2. **Lock the language.** Language of the user's first message, whole run. **The letter is always English.** 3. **Read the manuscript**, and the revised version if it exists. You need to know what was actually changed, and where. ## The structure Two documents, usually combined into one file: **1. The cover letter to the editor**, short: ``` Dear Professor <Editor>, Please find enclosed the revised version of our manuscript entitled "<title>" (<manuscript number>), together with our point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments. All reviewers' comments have been taken on board. The manuscript has been modified accordingly, and the new information appears highlighted in the corrected version. Yours sincerely, <Corresponding author> ``` **2. The point-by-point response.** For every comment, three things in this order: | Element | Content | | :--- |