"The paper's most striking finding—that Reflexion improves success by 12.0 percentage points in multi-fault scenarios—is based on only two fault scenarios … either: (i) significantly expand the multi-fault benchmark to include at least 10-20 distinct combinations of faults … or (ii) clearly frame the multi-fault finding as a preliminary observation requiring further investigation, and avoid presenting it as a main contribution in the abstract."

"the paper does not report standard deviations or confidence intervals for the success rates across the 1,500 runs … I recommend that the authors report means with standard deviations (or 95% confidence intervals) across multiple runs per scenario-configuration combination, and conduct appropriate statistical tests (e.g., paired t-tests or McNemar's test) for the key comparisons."

"the control experiment uses a different prompt format (the evaluator's verbatim reason) compared to the Reflexion condition (the model's own self-generated analysis), which introduces a confound … I recommend a more controlled experimental design: (i) a condition where the model receives the evaluator's failure reason but is also asked to "reflect" on it (i.e., external signal + reflection); (ii) a condition where the model receives a paraphrased version of the evaluator's reason …; and (iii) a condition where the model is asked to generate a reflection but is not shown the evaluator's reason (which is effectively the Reflexion condition)."

"Comment on "Green Cloud Multimedia Networking": The paper … does not directly address green cloud computing, multimedia networking, or energy efficiency. However, the findings have indirect implications … Future work could directly measure the energy consumption of each remediation strategy (in terms of GPU hours, API calls, and token generation)."

"The authors carefully observed the reviewers' comments, suggestions, and corrections … That said, the work now meet the quality standard of the journal to be published."

"The information available to the reflection module needs to be reported consistently. Sections III-B, III-C, and IV-K indicate that it receives the evaluator's failure reason, whereas Section IV-F states that the implemented module does not receive this information. Please reconcile these descriptions with the implementation used for each experiment."

"To isolate the contribution of reflection, the feedback-only and feedback-plus-reflection conditions should receive equivalent failure information under otherwise comparable conditions. Alternatively, the conclusions should be restricted to the configurations actually tested, without attributing a specific share of the original improvement to feedback or reflection."

"The post-hoc comparisons should also account for model–scenario grouping and unequal repetition counts."

"Section IV-G reports that 26 of 30 Case 7 baseline runs applied the correct repair but were classified as failures before the volume finished mounting. Although the analysis excluding Case 7 is useful, the principal baseline, retry, and reflection comparisons should also be assessed using a consistent, bounded stabilization window or an appropriate sensitivity analysis."

"Finally, please align Algorithm 1 with the revised finding that forwarding the evaluator's raw feedback should precede consideration of reflection. Recommendations concerning complex incidents should remain explicitly preliminary because the main benchmark contains only two multi-fault scenarios."

"Please also reconcile the recovery calculation in the response letter, reported as 141/298, with Table 8, which supports 141/299"

"the bibliography does not fully match the corrections claimed in the response letter. The response states that the bibliography increased to 36 entries, whereas the supplied revised manuscript ends at reference [31]. Several entries also lack the DOIs described as having been added, and reference [23] still contains a malformed author name."

"check the remaining cross-references and bibliography for consistency … the differences between the original and post-hoc scenario implementations should remain explicit wherever their results are interpreted."