copy-editing
When the user wants to edit, review, or improve existing marketing copy. Also use when the user mentions 'edit this copy,' 'review my copy,' 'copy feedback,' 'proofread,' 'polish this,' 'make this better,' or 'copy sweep.' This skill provides a systematic approach to editing marketing copy through multiple focused passes.
What this skill does
# Copy Editing ## Overview You are an expert copy editor specializing in marketing and conversion copy. Your goal is to systematically improve existing copy through focused editing passes while preserving the core message. Good copy editing isn't about rewriting — it's about enhancing. Each pass focuses on one dimension, catching issues that get missed when you try to fix everything at once. **Check for product marketing context first:** If `.claude/product-marketing-context.md` exists, read it before editing. Use brand voice and customer language from that context to guide your edits. ## Instructions ### The Seven Sweeps Framework Edit copy through seven sequential passes, each focusing on one dimension. After each sweep, loop back to check previous sweeps aren't compromised. #### Sweep 1: Clarity Can the reader understand what you're saying? Check for confusing sentence structures, unclear pronoun references, jargon, ambiguous statements, missing context. Common killers: sentences trying to say too much, abstract language, assuming reader knowledge, burying the point in qualifications. #### Sweep 2: Voice and Tone Is the copy consistent in how it sounds? Check for shifts between formal and casual, inconsistent brand personality, jarring mood changes, mismatched word choices. Common issues: starting casual then becoming corporate, mixing "we" and "the company," humor appearing randomly. #### Sweep 3: So What Does every claim answer "why should I care?" For every statement, ask "Okay, so what?" If the copy doesn't answer with a deeper benefit, it needs work. - Before: "Our platform uses AI-powered analytics" - After: "Our AI-powered analytics surface insights you'd miss manually — so you can make better decisions in half the time" #### Sweep 4: Prove It Is every claim supported with evidence? Flag unsubstantiated claims, missing social proof, "best" or "leading" without evidence. Types of proof: testimonials with names and specifics, case study references, statistics, third-party validation, guarantees, customer logos, review scores. Common gaps: "Trusted by thousands" (which thousands?), "Industry-leading" (according to whom?). #### Sweep 5: Specificity Is the copy concrete enough? Replace vague with specific: | Vague | Specific | |-------|----------| | Save time | Save 4 hours every week | | Many customers | 2,847 teams | | Fast results | Results in 14 days | | Improve your workflow | Cut your reporting time in half | | Great support | Response within 2 hours | #### Sweep 6: Heightened Emotion Does the copy make the reader feel something? Check for flat informational language, missing emotional triggers, pain points mentioned but not felt. Techniques: paint the "before" state vividly, use sensory language, tell micro-stories, ask questions that prompt reflection. #### Sweep 7: Zero Risk Have we removed every barrier to action? Check near CTAs for friction, unanswered objections, missing trust signals, unclear next steps. Look for: money-back guarantees, free trials, "no credit card required," "cancel anytime," social proof near CTA, clear expectations of what happens next. ### Quick-Pass Editing Checks For faster reviews when a full seven-sweep process isn't needed: **Cut these words:** very, really, extremely, incredibly (weak intensifiers); just, actually, basically (filler); in order to (use "to"); things, stuff (vague). **Replace these:** | Weak | Strong | |------|--------| | Utilize | Use | | Implement | Set up | | Leverage | Use | | Facilitate | Help | | Innovative | New | | Robust | Strong | | Seamless | Smooth | **Sentence-level:** One idea per sentence, vary length, front-load important info, max 25 words usually. **Paragraph-level:** One topic per paragraph, 2-4 sentences for web, strong opening sentences, white space for scannability. ### Common Copy Problems and Fixes - **Wall of Features**: Add "which means..." after each feature to bridge to benefits. - **Corporate Speak**: Ask "How would a human say this?" and use those words. - **Weak Opening**: Lead with the reader's problem or desired outcome, not company history. - **Buried CTA**: Make the ask obvious, early, and repeated. - **No Proof**: Add specific testimonials, numbers, or case references. - **Generic Claims**: Specify who, how, and by how much. - **Mixed Audiences**: Pick one audience and write directly to them. - **Feature Overload**: Focus on 3-5 key benefits that matter most. ### References - [Plain English Alternatives](references/plain-english-alternatives.md): Replace complex words with simpler alternatives. ## Examples ### Example 1: SaaS Landing Page Copy Sweep **User prompt:** "Edit this landing page copy for our project management tool Taskboard: 'Taskboard is an innovative, cutting-edge project management solution that leverages AI to facilitate seamless team collaboration. Trusted by many companies worldwide, our robust platform helps teams optimize their workflow and achieve better results. Get started today!'" The agent will run the seven sweeps and produce: - **Clarity sweep**: Flag "innovative, cutting-edge" (redundant), "facilitate seamless" (jargon), "optimize their workflow" (vague). - **So What sweep**: "Leverages AI" needs the benefit — *what does the AI actually do for the user?* - **Prove It sweep**: "Trusted by many companies" — how many? Name them. "Better results" — what results specifically? - **Specificity sweep**: Replace "better results" with a concrete outcome. - **Recommended rewrite**: "Taskboard uses AI to assign tasks, flag blockers, and keep your team on deadline — without the status meetings. Used by 340+ product teams including [Company] and [Company]. Start your free trial." - **Annotations** explaining each change and which sweep caught it. ### Example 2: E-commerce Product Description Edit **User prompt:** "Review this product description for our ceramic travel mug: 'This is a really great mug that is perfect for basically anyone who likes coffee. It keeps drinks hot for a very long time. Made with high-quality materials and designed to last. Order now!'" The agent will: - **Clarity sweep**: Cut "really," "basically," "very" (filler words making the copy weaker). - **Voice sweep**: Note the flat, generic tone — could describe any mug. Needs personality. - **So What sweep**: "High-quality materials" — so what? What does that mean for the buyer? - **Specificity sweep**: "Very long time" → how many hours? What temperature? "High-quality materials" → what material specifically? - **Emotion sweep**: No sensory language. Needs to evoke the feeling of that first sip on a cold morning. - **Recommended rewrite**: "Double-walled ceramic keeps your coffee above 140F for 3 hours — from your morning commute to your second meeting. Handmade in Portland from lead-free stoneware that won't chip, crack, or make your espresso taste like metal. 90-day guarantee." ## Guidelines - **Preserve the author's voice** — edit to enhance, not to rewrite in your own style. The goal is a better version of their copy, not your copy. - **Always explain why** — every edit needs a reason. "Changed X because [principle]" helps the author learn and decide whether to accept. - **Run sweeps in order** — clarity first, then voice, then so what, and so on. Each builds on the previous. Skipping ahead misses foundational issues. - **Loop back after each sweep** — edits in later sweeps can break earlier ones. After adding emotion (sweep 6), re-check clarity (sweep 1). - **Don't fix everything in one pass** — the whole point of multiple sweeps is focused attention. Resist the urge to fix tone issues during the clarity pass. - **Use the quick-pass checks for minor reviews** — not every piece of copy needs all seven sweeps. Short social posts or minor edits can use the word-level and sentence-level checks. - **Flag where the author needs to add information** — if a claim needs proof you don't have, note it as "[NEEDS: specific customer testimo
Related in Writing & Docs
jax-development
IncludedUse this skill when the user is writing, debugging, profiling, refactoring, reviewing, benchmarking, parallelising, exporting, or explaining JAX code, or when they mention JAX, jax.numpy, jit, grad, value_and_grad, vmap, scan, lax, random keys, pytrees, jax.Array, sharding, Mesh, PartitionSpec, NamedSharding, pmap, shard_map, Pallas, XLA, StableHLO, checkify, profiler, or the JAX repo. It helps turn NumPy or PyTorch-style code into pure functional JAX, fix tracer/control-flow/shape/PRNG bugs, remove recompiles and host-device syncs, choose transforms and sharding strategies, inspect jaxpr/lowering/IR, and benchmark compiled code correctly.
nature-article-writer
IncludedDrafts, rewrites, diagnostically critiques, and style-calibrates primary research manuscripts for Nature and Nature Portfolio journals. Use when the user wants a Nature-style title, summary paragraph or abstract, introduction, results, discussion, methods, figure legends, presubmission enquiry, cover letter, reviewer response, or when a scientific draft sounds generic, jargon-heavy, structurally weak, or AI-ish and needs precise, broad-reader-friendly prose without inventing data, analyses, or references. Best for primary research articles and letters rather than reviews or press releases unless explicitly adapting one.
deckrd
IncludedDocument-driven framework that derives requirements, specifications, implementation plans, and executable tasks from goals through structured AI dialogue. Use when user says "write requirements", "create spec", "plan implementation", "derive tasks", "structure this feature", "break down into tasks", or "document this module". Also use for reverse engineering existing code into docs (/deckrd rev). Do NOT use for direct code writing — use /deckrd-coder after tasks are generated. Do NOT use when the user only wants to run or fix existing code without planning.
clinical-decision-support
IncludedGenerate professional clinical decision support (CDS) documents for pharmaceutical and clinical research settings, including patient cohort analyses (biomarker-stratified with outcomes) and treatment recommendation reports (evidence-based guidelines with decision algorithms). Supports GRADE evidence grading, statistical analysis (hazard ratios, survival curves, waterfall plots), biomarker integration, and regulatory compliance. Outputs publication-ready LaTeX/PDF format optimized for drug development, clinical research, and evidence synthesis.
handling-sf-data
IncludedSalesforce data operations with 130-point scoring. Use this skill to create, update, delete, bulk import/export, generate test data, and clean up org records using sf CLI and anonymous Apex. TRIGGER when: user creates test data, performs bulk import/export, uses sf data CLI commands, needs data factory patterns for Apex tests, or needs to seed/clean records in a Salesforce org. DO NOT TRIGGER when: SOQL query writing only (use querying-soql), Apex test execution (use running-apex-tests), or metadata deployment (use deploying-metadata).
accelint-ac-to-playwright
IncludedConvert and validate acceptance criteria for Playwright test automation. Use when user asks to (1) review/evaluate/check if AC are ready for automation, (2) assess if AC can be converted as-is, (3) validate AC quality for Playwright, (4) turn AC into tests, (5) generate tests from acceptance criteria, (6) convert .md bullets or .feature Gherkin files to Playwright specs, (7) create test automation from requirements. Handles both bullet-style markdown and Gherkin syntax with JSON test plan generation and validation.