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,' or 'copy sweep.' This skill provides a systematic approach to editing marketing copy through multiple focused passes.

52

Quality

58%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./config/claude/skills/copy-editing/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

35%

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

This skill provides a comprehensive and well-structured framework for copy editing with useful concrete examples (vague vs. specific tables, word replacements, before/after examples). However, it is far too verbose for a skill file—much of the content explains concepts Claude already knows, and the seven sweeps contain significant redundancy in their structure and 'return to previous sweeps' instructions. The content would benefit greatly from aggressive condensation and splitting detailed sweep content into separate reference files.

Suggestions

Condense the seven sweeps to a summary table or brief list in SKILL.md, moving detailed sweep descriptions (what to check, common issues, process steps) into a separate SWEEPS.md reference file.

Remove explanations of concepts Claude already understands (what clarity means, what voice consistency is, what emotional copy looks like) and focus only on the specific checks, examples, and decision criteria unique to this framework.

Eliminate the duplicated checklist section—it restates the sweeps content. Either keep the checklist OR the detailed sweeps, not both inline.

Simplify the cumulative 'return to all previous sweeps' instruction into a single clear rule (e.g., 'After each sweep, spot-check that previous sweep qualities are maintained') rather than repeating an expanding list after every sweep.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

This skill is extremely verbose at ~400+ lines. It over-explains concepts Claude already understands (what clarity means, what voice consistency is, what emotion in copy looks like). The seven sweeps framework, while structured, repeats patterns extensively (each sweep has nearly identical process steps and 'return to previous sweeps' instructions). The checklist section largely duplicates the sweeps content. Much of this could be condensed to 30-40% of its current length.

1 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides concrete examples (vague vs. specific tables, before/after copy examples, word replacement lists) which are genuinely useful. However, it's an instruction-only skill with no executable code, and many of the 'processes' are still somewhat abstract ('Read through quickly, highlighting unclear parts'). The examples like the 'So What' test are actionable, but much guidance remains at the level of general advice rather than precise, copy-paste-ready instructions.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The seven sweeps are clearly sequenced and each sweep includes a process section with numbered steps. However, the cumulative 'return to all previous sweeps' instruction after each sweep creates an exponentially growing review loop that is impractical and unclear in execution. There are no concrete validation checkpoints—no way to verify edits are actually improvements beyond subjective re-reading. The 'Working with Copy Sweeps' section adds collaborative workflow but lacks specificity.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references one external file (references/plain-english-alternatives.md) and links to related skills, which is good. However, the massive amount of inline content (seven full sweep descriptions, quick-pass checks, checklist, common problems, collaborative workflow) should be split into separate files. The checklist alone could be a separate reference. The content is a near-monolithic wall despite having section headers.

2 / 3

Total

7

/

12

Passed

Description

82%

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

This is a solid description with excellent trigger term coverage and clear completeness, explicitly stating both what the skill does and when to use it. Its main weaknesses are a lack of specific concrete actions (what do the 'multiple focused passes' actually do?) and some overlap risk with general editing or proofreading skills due to generic trigger terms like 'make this better.'

Suggestions

Add specific concrete actions performed during the editing passes, e.g., 'checks tone consistency, strengthens CTAs, tightens messaging, corrects grammar' to improve specificity.

Differentiate more clearly from general editing/proofreading skills by emphasizing marketing-specific aspects like brand voice, persuasion, audience targeting in the trigger terms.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description mentions 'editing marketing copy through multiple focused passes' and lists actions like 'edit, review, or improve,' but doesn't specify concrete actions like what the passes entail (e.g., grammar check, tone adjustment, CTA optimization). It names the domain and some actions but isn't comprehensive.

2 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (systematic approach to editing marketing copy through multiple focused passes) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' triggers with specific phrases like 'edit this copy,' 'proofread,' 'polish this,' etc.).

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'edit this copy,' 'review my copy,' 'copy feedback,' 'proofread,' 'polish this,' 'make this better,' 'copy sweep.' These are highly natural phrases a user would use.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The focus on 'marketing copy' editing is somewhat specific, but terms like 'proofread,' 'make this better,' and 'polish this' are generic enough to potentially overlap with general writing/editing skills or non-marketing copy editing skills.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

90%

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

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
freekmurze/dotfiles
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.