Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skills --skill nlp-rebuttalgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skills/nlp-rebuttal)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skills/nlp-rebuttal"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skills/nlp-rebuttal/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skills/nlp-rebuttal"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skills/nlp-rebuttal.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00146 | $0.01316 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00073 | $0.00658 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00263 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00132 |
Grade A, and why
nlp-rebuttal scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 85 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
NLP Rebuttal Scenario Playbook
Translated and adapted from MLNLP-World/Paper-Rebuttal-Tips. 28 recurring reviewer-concern scenarios. Each has four parts: the concern, a bad answer that backfires, a recommended answer template, and the takeaway.
Good rebuttal = Respect + Evidence + Clarity.
How to use
- Classify each reviewer comment with the router below.
- Load ONLY the reference file(s) for the matched tips.
- Adapt the recommended-answer template: replace every placeholder (XXX, A/B/C, Table X) with the paper's real content and freshly computed numbers. Never ship a template verbatim.
- For overall response structure, ordering, and tone, use the
write-rebuttalskill (itemize → brain-dump → draft → revise, the 18 tactics, the neutral-third-party test). These two skills compose: that one shapes the whole response, this one shapes each answer.
Concern router
| Reviewer concern sounds like | Tip | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| "Too complex", "bag of tricks", "which component matters?" | 1 | innovation-theory.md |
| "Not novel", "similar to prior work A" | 2 | innovation-theory.md |
| "Just a combination of existing techniques" | 3 | innovation-theory.md |
| "Contributions unclear" | 4 | innovation-theory.md |
| "Motivation unclear", "why is this problem important?" | 5 | innovation-theory.md |
| "No theoretical analysis", "why does it work?" | 6 | innovation-theory.md |
| "Limitations discussion is superficial" | 7 | innovation-theory.md |
| "Related work missing/insufficient" | 8 | communication-writing.md |
| "Writing/notation unclear" | 9 | communication-writing.md |
| Reviewer misunderstood the method | 10 | communication-writing.md |
| Vague, low-quality negative review | 11 | communication-writing.md |
| Tempted to reply "we will add..." | 12 | communication-writing.md |
| "Missing/weak baselines" | 13 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Improvements are marginal" | 14 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Unfair experimental setup" | 15 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Missing ablations" | 16 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Too much computational overhead" | 17 | experiments-evidence.md |
| Asked for experiments too large for the rebuttal window | 18 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Dataset too small" | 19 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Generalization not shown" (few datasets/models/tasks) | 20 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "No variance / significance / seeds" | 21 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Possible train/test leakage or contamination" | 22 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Hyperparameter sensitivity?" ("why k=40?") | 23 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Wrong/missing evaluation metrics" | 24 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "No human evaluation" | 25 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "Intermediate outputs never evaluated directly" | 26 | experiments-evidence.md |
| Claims "continual/online" but experiments are one-shot offline | 27 | experiments-evidence.md |
| "No code, seeds, or hyperparameters — not reproducible" | 28 | experiments-evidence.md |
What ships with it
3 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 12d ago First seen · 85 lines · 146 tokens per session scan A f3c705525ca7
nlp-rebuttal is a skill published in the GitHub repository yuangao-tum/rebuttal-skills (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 146 tokens to every session and 1,316 once invoked, about $0.0007 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
omnirebuttal
Unified author-response skill for all peer-review rebuttal formats: CV one-page PDF (CVPR/ICCV/ECCV), OpenReview threaded discussion (NeurIPS/ICLR/ACM MM), per-review character limits (ICML/KDD), Nature/journal point-by-point revision letters, and ARR/TMLR rolling revision. Routes by venue artifact family after shared…
secure-auth
Secure authentication patterns (OWASP, NIST). Use for login, registration, password reset, sessions, JWT, OAuth, MFA, passkeys.
academic-writing
Scholarly writing and research compliance. Use for CRediT, preregistration, Plan S, Nelson Memo, preprints, ORCID, LLM disclosure.
web-archiving
Web archiving and retrieval via Wayback Machine and Archive.today. Use to preserve content, reach dead pages, or save evidence.
accessibility-compliance
Web accessibility patterns for news and academic sites. Use for WCAG audits, alt text, accessible data viz, and assistive tech.
one-way-door
Flags irreversible decisions before commit. Use for data models, infra, auth boundaries, API contracts, event schemas, CI/CD.