I have read the author response, the manuscript, and the supplemental materials. I thank the authors for their considered responses to reviewer comments. The reviewer comments contained a mix of minor requests for revisions and a major philosophical point as to whether this paper is appropriate for publication in ESURF. The criteria for publication in ESURF and past papers suggest this paper is within the scope of the journal. Other reviewer comments are fully addressed.

I have made some additional, very minor suggestions to the text (see attached pdf). In addition, I think there are some changes to be made to the supplement (as this will become part of the publication record).

Before I write those changes down, I'd like to thank the authors for the attention to detail present in the instruction manual. It is an excellent community resource and will help streamline topographic analysis for many geomorphologists.

p.17: This seems trivial but can you add a citation (or citations) to section 7.2? Is this done using fastscape? Is it d8 flow routing (I’m sure it is but it makes sense to be transparent)?

Figure 6: Something has gone wrong on my version: there is a black box in the lower left.

Page 31, top: How is the best fit concavity fit? It sounds algorithmic. But I think this is just a regression through manually picked segments. Is that right? Although the section on page 31 is fairly clear I think it should be highlighted that selection is manual rather than algorithmic. Also, is segment selection reproducible? I’d like to see a few sentences about that. If you select segments for a paper, how is the next author to reproduce your output? Can you read in the segment boundary file?

Page 37: Can users of the compiled code see any of these outputs? Does it print files in other formats than .mat? It might be useful to reference to the scipy.io module of python, that can read .mat files (https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/tutorial/io.html).

Top page 41: Again, I suggest adding a note about the reproducibility of these picked knicks. Can you output a file that allows another user to reproduce the outputs?

Figure 14: Is this from the San Gabriel data? Say where it is from. Also, throughout: if the figures are generated from example data that is provided with the package say so.

Figure 15: These features seem incredibly useful. Nice work.

Page 49: How is the length of the hillslope calculated? It is okay to just refer to the 2016 paper but since this is nontrivial and is essential to interpreting the results I think users should be aware that this is not straightforward at all.

Figure 24 caption: heatmap of what?

Thanks to the authors for their corrections and clarifications. I'm sure this will be a widely read contribution to ESURF.

Dear Adam,
I am delighted to inform you that your paper has been accepted for final publication in ESurf - subject to typesetting and proof reading etc... Thank you for all your work with the corrections and clarifications - it looks like a great contribution.
All the best,
Tom Coulthard