Agent skill

Oleafly Response Letter

by Oleafly in Oleafly/Oleafly

Turn reviewer comments and the changes already made into a point-by-point response letter, in LaTeX or Typst and in plain text.

MITAuto-check passedDocuments & Office

Install Oleafly Response Letter

skills CLI
$ npx skills add Oleafly/Oleafly --skill oleafly-response-letter -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install Oleafly/Oleafly oleafly-response-letter --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Oleafly/Oleafly.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/src-tauri/resources/skills/oleafly-response-letter .claude/skills/oleafly-response-letter && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
oleafly-response-letter
GitHub stars
212
Token cost
~2.3k tokens
SKILL.md length
1,147 words
Files
5 (incl. references, assets)
Skills in repo
12
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Turn reviewer comments and the changes already made into a point-by-point response letter, in LaTeX or Typst and in plain text.

  • Works in 6 steps: Capture the comments verbatim → Find out what actually changed → Map each point to the manuscript → …
  • Preparing a rebuttal
  • SKILL.md covers Procedure, Decision points, When something goes wrong and Artifacts, plus 1 more section
  • Calls git

What it does

Oleafly Response Letter is an agent skill from Oleafly/Oleafly. Turn reviewer comments and the changes already made into a point-by-point response letter, in LaTeX or Typst and in plain text. Use when preparing a rebuttal, an author response, or a revision cover letter for a journal or conference, when mapping each reviewer point to the passage that changed, when a resubmission needs every comment answered, or when a response letter has to compile alongside the paper.

Its SKILL.md is about 2.3k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 6 other files, including reference files and assets (for example `assets/response-outline.md` and `references/tone-and-structure.md`). Compatibility notes: Any LaTeX or Typst project. Finding what changed works best when the project is a git repository, which Oleafly projects are by default. The bundled templates…

It sits in Documents & Office, covering LaTeX and Resume and CV writing. It works with LaTeX and Git. The repository describes itself as: The local-first AI assisted research workspace for scientific writing & publishing. Research, Write, Compile, Verify and Publish in LaTeX • Typst • Markdown • Git-native • Open…. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Preparing a rebuttal
  • An author response
  • A revision cover letter for a journal
  • Mapping each reviewer point to the passage that changed

Example prompts

  • “/oleafly-response-letter”

Requirements

  • Compatibility (from SKILL.md): Any LaTeX or Typst project. Finding what changed works best when the project is a git repository, which Oleafly projects are by default. The bundled templates compile on the app engines with no extra packages.
  • Pre-approved tools (allowed-tools): read_file, list_files, search_project, create_file, write_file, replace_in_file, compile, get_log, set_main_doc, run_command, read_skill_file, show_location, update_todos

Workflow steps

6 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Capture the comments verbatim
  2. Find out what actually changed
  3. Map each point to the manuscript
  4. Draft both versions
  5. Compile the letter
  6. Check it before you hand it over

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit dc582ef. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves these tools, so the agent can use them without asking each time:

    • read_file
    • list_files
    • search_project
    • create_file
    • write_file
    • replace_in_file
    • compile
    • get_log
    • set_main_doc
    • run_command

    …and 3 more on the same allowed-tools line.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    Shell commands in SKILL.md call:

    • git

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md. Its commands use git, which can reach the network depending on how they are called.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

  • Compatibility

    Any LaTeX or Typst project. Finding what changed works best when the project is a git repository, which Oleafly projects are by default. The bundled templates compile on the app engines with no extra packages.

    From compatibility in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

Context cost

Oleafly Response Letter loads about 2.3k tokens when it runs, and up to ~3.4k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 108 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,147 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~108
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~2.3k
With references · SKILL.md plus every file in references/, read only if the agent opens them
~3.4k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from Oleafly/Oleafly at commit dc582ef, republished under its MIT licence (© Oleafly). 1,147 words, ~2,309 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/oleafly-response-letter/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 4 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
oleafly-response-letter
description
Turn reviewer comments and the changes already made into a point-by-point response letter, in LaTeX or Typst and in plain text. Use when preparing a rebuttal, an author response, or a revision cover letter for a journal or conference, when mapping each reviewer point to the passage that changed, when a resubmission needs every comment answered, or when a response letter has to compile alongside the paper.
allowed-tools
read_file, list_files, search_project, create_file, write_file, replace_in_file, compile, get_log, set_main_doc, run_command, read_skill_file, show_location, update_todos
compatibility
Any LaTeX or Typst project. Finding what changed works best when the project is a git repository, which Oleafly projects are by default. The bundled templates compile on the app engines with no extra packages.
license
MIT
metadata.version
1.1.0
metadata.skill-author
Oleafly

Write a response letter

Reviewers gave comments. The paper changed. This turns those two things into a letter that answers every point and shows where in the manuscript the answer lives.

The letter is a working draft for the authors to check and sign. Every claim in it about what changed must be true, because an editor can and will check.

Procedure

1. Capture the comments verbatim

Get the reviewer comments from wherever the user has them: an attached file, pasted text in the chat, or a file already in the project. Save them unedited with create_file and write_file to review/comments.md.

Number every separable point as you go. One reviewer paragraph often holds three requests, and an unnumbered request is a request that gets missed.

## Reviewer 1

R1.1 The sample size justification is missing.
R1.2 Table 2 reports means without dispersion.
R1.3 The related work section omits the closest prior method.

## Reviewer 2

R2.1 ...

Keep the reviewer's wording exactly. Do not paraphrase, soften, or merge points. If the comments arrive as a PDF, ask the user to paste the text or save it into the project, because reviewer letters are usually confidential and should not go through a network tool.

If no comments were supplied, stop and ask for them. Do not invent plausible reviewer comments.

2. Find out what actually changed

Oleafly commits a checkpoint automatically as you work, so the project is normally a git repository with a usable history.

run_command  git log --oneline -40
run_command  git diff <revision> -- <path>
run_command  git diff --stat <revision>

Pick the revision from before the revision round started. If the user knows the date of submission, git log --since=<date> narrows it. run_command needs approval, and it runs in the project directory, so use relative paths.

When git is not available, the history does not go back far enough, or the user declines the command, ask the user to describe the changes and work from that. Say clearly in your final report that the mapping is based on their description rather than on a diff.

3. Map each point to the manuscript

For every numbered point, find the passage that answers it:

  • search_project for a distinctive fragment of the new text
  • read_file around the hit to quote it accurately and get the line number
  • Record file:line and the exact new sentence

Some points map to no change, because you disagreed, because the request was out of scope, or because the data does not exist. Record those as unaddressed with a reason. Do not quietly skip them.

Track the mapping with update_todos so a point cannot fall out of the list.

4. Draft both versions

Write two files:

  • review/response.md, plain text, for pasting into a submission form or an email
  • the typeset letter for the venues that want a PDF, in the paper's own language: response.typ from assets/response-template.typ in a Typst project, and response.tex from assets/response-template.tex otherwise

The LaTeX template gives you five macros and nothing else to learn:

latex
\reviewer{1}
\point{R1.1}{The sample size justification is missing.}
\reply{We have added the power calculation that determined the group size.}
\changed{sections/methods.tex, line 84}{With 80\% power at alpha = 0.05 to detect a difference of 0.4 SD, each arm required 99 participants.}

\reviewer opens a reviewer block, \point prints the comment in italics, \reply prints your answer, and \changed shows where the manuscript changed and quotes the new text. \notchanged marks a point you did not act on.

The Typst template defines the same five functions under the same names:

typst
#reviewer(1)
#point[R1.1][The sample size justification is missing.]
#reply[We have added the power calculation that determined the group size.]
#changed("sections/methods.typ, line 84")[With 80% power at alpha = 0.05 to detect a difference of 0.4 SD, each arm required 99 participants.]

The location in #changed is a plain string, and everything else is content in square brackets. Read references/tone-and-structure.md before writing the prose.

5. Compile the letter

The letter is a second document in the same project, and a project has one main document at a time. Two ways to handle that:

Compile it in place. Note the current main document first, because you have to put it back.

  1. set_main_doc to response.tex or response.typ
  2. compile, and get_log if it fails
  3. set_main_doc back to the paper's main file, whether the compile succeeded or not

Never leave the project pointing at the response letter. set_main_doc also picks the engine from the file extension and it changes what the preview pane shows, so a project left in that state looks broken to the user next time they open it.

Or leave it to the user. Tell them the letter is written and that switching the main document to compile it is a one-click change they can make when they want the PDF. This is the safer option in a long agent run where the restore step might not be reached.

Show full SKILL.md (459 more words)Show less
6. Check it before you hand it over
  • Every numbered point has a reply.
  • Every "we have changed X" claim has a real file:line behind it.
  • Unaddressed points are marked as unaddressed, with a reason.
  • No reviewer is contradicted with a different answer than another reviewer got for the same issue.

Then call show_location on two or three of the largest changes so the user can see them, and report in chat: how many points, how many addressed, which ones are not, and where the two files are.

Decision points

SituationWhat to do
No comments suppliedAsk for them. Never invent reviewer comments.
Comments only exist as a PDFAsk the user to paste or save the text. Reviewer letters are confidential.
Project is not a git repositoryWork from the user's description and say so in the report.
run_command declinedSame as above. Do not retry the command in a different form.
Two reviewers ask for opposite changesAnswer both in the same terms, explain the choice once, and reference it from the second reply.
A request is out of scopeSay so plainly, explain why, and offer what you did instead.
A request needs data that does not existMark it unaddressed, say what would be needed, and add a limitation to the paper if one is missing.
The venue caps the response lengthCut the reply prose, never the number of points answered.

When something goes wrong

  • git diff output is enormous: narrow it with a path (git diff <rev> -- sections/) or use --stat first to find which files moved.
  • search_project cannot find the new sentence: the source wraps lines, so search a short fragment with no punctuation or markup in it.
  • The LaTeX template does not compile: the macros need nothing beyond article, geometry, xcolor, and parskip. If it still fails, get_log and look for a stray % or an unescaped &, _, or # copied out of a reviewer comment. Reviewer text is the usual culprit, because it was written in a plain-text editor.
  • The Typst template does not compile: it uses no packages, so the cause is almost always reviewer text inside the square brackets. Escape #, $, *, _, @, < and backticks with a backslash, and keep brackets balanced.
  • You set the main document and then the run ended: tell the user in your reply exactly which file to set back.

Artifacts

  • review/comments.md, the reviewer comments verbatim and numbered
  • review/response.md, the plain-text response
  • response.tex or response.typ, the typeset response letter

Done when

  • Every reviewer point is numbered and appears in the response.
  • Every claimed change is anchored to a file and a line that exists.
  • Unaddressed points are visible as unaddressed.
  • The main document is back to the paper.
  • The user has been told which points still need their decision.

© Oleafly, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 4 other files (references, assets) in src-tauri/resources/skills/oleafly-response-letter of Oleafly/Oleafly.

  • SKILL.md
  • assets/response-outline.md
  • assets/response-template.tex
  • assets/response-template.typ
  • references/tone-and-structure.md

Open the folder on GitHubat commit dc582ef

Compare with similar skills

Oleafly Response Letter next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Oleafly Response Letter compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Oleafly Response Letter this skillOleafly/Oleafly212—~2.3kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Write Paperfrenzymath/Danus476—~18kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
ProjectHurricaHjz/second-yourself123—~3.1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Review Overleaffcakyon/claude-codex-settings1.2k—~940Automated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Latex Diffflonat/flonat-research146—~1.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Overleaf CLI Guidewentorai/research-plugins2981 repos~1.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Write Paper

    frenzymath/Danus

    Turn a project's verified fact graph into a publishable LaTeX paper in a configurable house style — a standalone amsart .tex with a real bibliography, compiled to PDF.

    476 GitHub stars~18k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • Project

    HurricaHjz/second-yourself

    Manage the owner's OWN working repositories (Overleaf LaTeX projects, code repositories) from the vault, on an explicit instruction only: /project link | open | sync | brief | snapshot | status |…

    123 GitHub stars~3.1k tokensUpdated 8 days ago
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • Review Overleaf

    fcakyon/claude-codex-settings

    This skill should be used when user asks to "fetch overleaf review comments", "address overleaf reviews", "apply overleaf comments", "review my overleaf paper", "sync overleaf feedback to local"…

    1.2k GitHub stars~940 tokensUpdated yesterday
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • Latex Diff

    flonat/flonat-research

    Compare two LaTeX files, project directories, or Git revisions and produce human-readable plus machine-readable severity-graded semantic changes.

    146 GitHub stars~1.9k tokensUpdated 11 days ago
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • Overleaf CLI Guide

    wentorai/research-plugins

    Sync and manage Overleaf LaTeX projects from the command line

    298 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.9k tokens
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • Cover Letter

    bahayonghang/academic-writing-skills

    Submission cover-letter assistant for existing LaTeX manuscripts.

    500 GitHub stars~2.8k tokensUpdated 12 days ago
    Business, Finance & HRAuto-check passed

More from Oleafly/Oleafly

All 12 skills in this repo
  • Perform bounded, local exploratory analysis of explicitly supported scientific files.

    212 GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~3.4k tokens
    Auto-check: notes
  • Experimental Design

    Oleafly/Oleafly

    Design experiments and studies BEFORE data is collected — choosing a design, randomizing, blocking, and laying out treatment combinations so results are interpretable.

    212 GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~3.5k tokens
    Auto-check: notes
  • Facilitates evidence-aware scientific ideation with independent generation, structured discussion, explicit assumptions, transparent evaluation, adversarial review, and decision logs.

    212 GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~3.5k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Create and audit truthful, accessible, publication-ready scientific figures with Matplotlib, Seaborn, or Plotly.

    212 GitHub stars~3.4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check: notes
  • Turn a research question into an annotated reading list with provenance.

    212 GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Oleafly Research Loop

    Oleafly/Oleafly

    Entry point for research writing in Oleafly. An agent skill from Oleafly/Oleafly.

    212 GitHub stars~3.7k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

Works with

Questions about Oleafly Response Letter

What does Oleafly Response Letter do?

Turn reviewer comments and the changes already made into a point-by-point response letter, in LaTeX or Typst and in plain text. Oleafly Response Letter is an agent skill from Oleafly/Oleafly. Turn reviewer comments and the changes already made into a point-by-point response letter, in LaTeX or Typst and in plain text.

When should I use Oleafly Response Letter?

Oleafly Response Letter fits situations like: preparing a rebuttal; an author response; A revision cover letter for a journal; mapping each reviewer point to the passage that changed.

How do I install Oleafly Response Letter in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add Oleafly/Oleafly --skill oleafly-response-letter -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (src-tauri/resources/skills/oleafly-response-letter in Oleafly/Oleafly) into .claude/skills/oleafly-response-letter in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Oleafly Response Letter in Codex?

Run `npx skills add Oleafly/Oleafly --skill oleafly-response-letter -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (src-tauri/resources/skills/oleafly-response-letter in Oleafly/Oleafly) into .agents/skills/oleafly-response-letter in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Oleafly Response Letter in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add Oleafly/Oleafly --skill oleafly-response-letter -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/oleafly-response-letter, .gemini/skills/oleafly-response-letter, .github/skills/oleafly-response-letter and .opencode/skills/oleafly-response-letter in your project.

What does Oleafly Response Letter need to run?

Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Oleafly Response Letter needs the command-line tools its instructions call (git). Its frontmatter pre-approves these tools: read_file, list_files, search_project, create_file, write_file, replace_in_file, compile, get_log, set_main_doc, run_command, read_skill_file, show_location, update_todos. Compatibility (from SKILL.md): Any LaTeX or Typst project. Finding what changed works best when the project is a git repository, which Oleafly projects are by default. The bundled templates compile on the app engines with no extra packages..

Does Oleafly Response Letter access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Its commands use git, which can reach the network depending on how they are called. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Oleafly Response Letter safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Oleafly Response Letter use?

Oleafly Response Letter is published under the MIT licence (declared in SKILL.md). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Oleafly Response Letter use?

About 2.3k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 9.2k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 1.1k tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.

What are the alternatives to Oleafly Response Letter?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Oleafly Response Letter: Write Paper (frenzymath/Danus, 476 stars), Project (HurricaHjz/second-yourself, 123 stars), Review Overleaf (fcakyon/claude-codex-settings, 1.2k stars) and Latex Diff (flonat/flonat-research, 146 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Oleafly Response Letter?

Oleafly (a GitHub organization) maintains it in Oleafly/Oleafly, which has 212 GitHub stars. The repository holds 12 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 10, 2026.

Source: Oleafly/Oleafly on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.