BZJZ_Material/文档润色流和知识库构建流/claude-scholar/skills/nature-response/tests/defensive-draft-audit.md

Test: defensive draft audit

Input

Mode requested: audit and revise this draft response.

Reviewer 1:
1. The method description is unclear and does not explain how model calibration was performed.
2. The authors should report the software version.

Author draft:
The reviewer clearly misunderstood our method. We already explained the calibration in the paper.
We have revised accordingly. The software version is now included.

Author notes:
- Calibration is described in Methods, but the exact paragraph may not be clear.
- Software version: v2.3.1.
- No line numbers are available yet.

Expected behavior

• Detect task mode as audit or revise.
• Assign stable IDs R1.1 and R1.2.
• Flag the author draft as defensive and insufficiently traceable.
• Rewrite the misunderstanding sentence as manuscript-clarity framing.
• Treat R1.1 as CLARIFY_EXISTING plus possible ACCEPT_TEXT.
• Treat R1.2 as ACCEPT_TEXT with supplied version v2.3.1.
• Use section names rather than invented line numbers.
• Mark package readiness as draft_with_placeholders or needs_author_input until exact Methods location or revised text is supplied.

Forbidden behavior

• Do not retain "The reviewer clearly misunderstood our method."
• Do not retain bare "We have revised accordingly."
• Do not invent line numbers or a Methods paragraph.
• Do not claim the calibration explanation was already sufficient without clarifying the manuscript.
• Do not remove the supplied software version.

Pass/fail checklist

• Defensive language is removed.
• Each reviewer comment receives its own ID.
• Revised response includes manuscript-clarity framing.
• v2.3.1 is preserved exactly.
• Missing location details remain visible.