amann-revision

1# Revision & Response for a Review (amann-revision)
2 
3## When to trigger
4 
5- A proposal decision letter arrived (invited / revise-and-resubmit / declined)
6- A full-review referee letter arrived (major revision is the norm for a long review)
7- Referees flagged "no real framework," missing streams, imbalance, or "reads like a list"
8- You need a point-by-point response letter for a review article, not a primary paper
9 
10## First: which letter is this?
11 
12Annals' two-step process produces two kinds of feedback, and they call for different moves:
13 
14- **Proposal-stage feedback** (double-blind, from the Associate Editors). The decision is mainly about *fit and promise*: is the literature Annals-scale, and is there a genuinely new framework under "New insights"? A revise-and-resubmit here usually means sharpen the contribution before the full review is invited — route back through `amann-topic-selection` / `amann-organizing-framework` / `amann-proposal-framing`.
15- **Full-review feedback** (editor-only: Associate Editor and Editor). The review is being developed; feedback is about *execution* — framework strength, coverage, balance, attitude, accessibility. This is the classic point-by-point revision below.
16 
17## Categories of full-review feedback (and how to answer each)
18 
19Triage every point into one bucket:
20 
21| Feedback type | Typical phrasing | Response move |
22|---------------|------------------|---------------|
23…