This is a well written paper describing the implementation of the extreme convection parameterization into the MPTRAC model and sensitivity simulations describing the impact of using this parameterization on tracer transport. My recommendation is for this paper to be published with minor edits.

It is mentioned in Section 2.2 that MPTRAC is used to investigate free troposphere and stratosphere transport processes. It does not mention why it is not used for boundary layer applications until the end of Section 3.7. This should be mentioned in Section 2.2 followed by a discussion of the importance of the depth the tracers are initialized near the surface so they cover the depth of the PBL. I recommend moving Section 3.7 into or soon after Section 2.2.

Throughout the paper, meteorological model output and reanalysis products are referred to as data. I prefer the word 'data' be reserved for measurements. I suggest re-wording this throughout the paper. For example, I suggest changing the second sentence of the abstract to something like: “Lagrangian transport simulations driven by meteorological fields from global models or reanalysis products, such as the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts’ (ECMWF’s) ERA5 and ERA-Interim reanalysis, typically lack proper explicit representations of convective up- and downdrafts because of the limited spatiotemporal resolution of the meteorology.

Introduction, page 2, line 27: add comma between conditions and such: “…severe weather conditions, such as …”

Throughout the paper it is mentioned that trajectories were performed. I suggest rephrasing that 10^6 trajectories were performed to a dispersion simulation with 10^6 particles. I think of a trajectory as following the mean wind whereas a dispersion simulation includes a turbulent component.

Throughout the Results section (especially toward the beginning), be abundantly clear that ECP simulations is a simulation with a CAPE threshold of 0. Same for all of the figure captions.

Section 3.2, page 11, line 249 – page 12, line 250: Is this shown that it is similar to Konopka et al. (2022)?

Section 3.6: Suggest changing the title of this section: Change “Improvement” to “Sensitivity”

Please find detailed comments in the Supplement.