The reviewer satisfied most of your responses, but two further questions were proposed. I agree these questions are reasonable, and hence I ask authors to address them. Also, the reviewer suggested other minor concerns, which enable authors to improve the manuscript.

The authors adequately revised the manuscript on referee's comments for the previous draft, and now I can encourage publishing this manuscript in the GMD. However, prior to the final acceptance, authors need to address the following minor concerns.

(1) P1L7 "JULES was found to simulate interannual variability (IAV) at global scales."
Rephrase this sentence more specifically.

(2) P7L22 "CDO"
This manuscript employed too much abbreviations. As the CDO is an infrequent term, replace it with full words.

(3) P15L20 "(Table2,"
Missing a closing parenthesis.

(4)
P17L9 "because of a lack of drought-deciduous PFTs in JULES"
P18L14 "due to lack of drought-deciduous PFTs in JULES"
Avoid to mention it in a predicable way. Lack of drought-deciduous PFTs would NOT be the only possible explanation for difference between simulation and observation.

(5) P17L12 "The model is able to simulate"
It would be better to replace this term with "The model can reasonably reproduce".