CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

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,' 'copy sweep,' 'tighten this up,' 'this reads awkwardly,' 'clean up this text,' 'too wordy,' or 'sharpen the messaging.' Use this when the user already has copy and wants it improved rather than rewritten from scratch. For writing new copy, see copywriting.

88

1.02x
Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.02x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

The canonical home for this skill is copy-editing in coreyhaines31/marketingskills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

73%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, actionable copy-editing skill with an excellent sequenced workflow and feedback loops. Its main weakness is conciseness: the sweeps, quick-pass checks, and checklist restate overlapping material, and some sections restate widely known writing guidance.

Suggestions

Consolidate the redundant quick-pass checks and the final checklist so each sweep's criteria live in one place, removing the triple restatement of the same guidance.

Drop or compress widely known reminders (e.g., 'cut very/really,' 'avoid passive voice') unless tied to a sweep-specific decision; assume Claude's competence on basic mechanics.

Add one short worked example: a before/after marketing paragraph edited through one or two sweeps, so readers see the method applied end-to-end.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and the Seven Sweeps framework adds genuine structure Claude likely lacks, but the content restates well-known concepts (cut 'very/really,' avoid passive voice) and the full sweep descriptions, quick-pass checks, and checklist restate the same material three times, creating noticeable padding; not a 4 because the redundancy is substantial.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, executable guidance including the So What test with ❌/✅ examples, a vague→specific upgrade table, a weak→strong word replacement table, and problem/symptom/fix triples; the minor gap keeping it from 5 is the absence of a worked before/after example walking a real paragraph through a full sweep.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced multi-step process (seven ordered sweeps) with explicit feedback loops—each sweep names exactly which prior sweeps to revisit and the framework loops back after each pass—matching the top anchor for explicit validation/checkpoint structure.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure with clear section headers and one real, well-signaled one-level reference (references/plain-english-alternatives.md, verified to exist); most framework content is inline rather than split into separate files, which is reasonable here but keeps it just below the top anchor.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

90%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, trigger-rich description that clearly scopes the skill and disambiguates it from copywriting. The only weaker dimension is specificity, where the named actions are somewhat generic verbs rather than a comprehensive concrete list.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (marketing copy) and three concrete actions ('edit, review, or improve existing marketing copy'), but the actions are generic verbs rather than a comprehensive, specific list; not a 4 because the concrete actions lack specificity beyond the verbs themselves.

3 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (edit/review/improve existing marketing copy) and 'when' with concrete trigger phrases, plus a clear boundary clause ('For writing new copy, see copywriting'), satisfying the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive coverage of natural user phrases including many synonyms and exact utterances users would say ('edit this copy,' 'review my copy,' 'proofread,' 'polish this,' 'tighten this up,' 'too wordy,' 'sharpen the messaging'), matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (improving existing copy vs. writing new copy) with an explicit boundary to copywriting and distinct, specific triggers, giving minimal conflict risk.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.