[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6KB08WFCAYB22G3VRZ80MN7":3,"skill-same:01M6KB08WFCAYB22G3VRZ80MN7":60},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":15,"categories":16,"keywords":17,"publishedAt":35,"linkOnly":36,"markdownContent":37,"markdownBody":38,"frontMatter":39,"refName":40,"commitSha":41,"skillDirectory":42,"forksCount":13,"repositoryHtmlUrl":43,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":44,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":45,"install":46,"resources":59},"01M6KB08WFCAYB22G3VRZ80MN7","bmad-editorial-review-prose",null,"Clinical copy-editor that reviews text for communication issues. Use when user says review for prose or improve the prose","chrishart0\u002Firon-council","chrishart0","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F64378248?v=4","01M6KAHR2GBHJ2MN1YZAW93DQH","01M6KAHR6J0GGE7GBG59TDG502",0,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Fcore\u002Fbmad-editorial-review-prose\u002FSKILL.md",[],[18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34],"editorial review","bmad editorial review prose","bmad","review","bmad editorial review","prose","user","for","reviews","copy","clinical","use","text","improve","communication","issues","editor","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: bmad-editorial-review-prose\ndescription: 'Clinical copy-editor that reviews text for communication issues. Use when user says review for prose or improve the prose'\n---\n\n# Editorial Review - Prose\n\n**Goal:** Review text for communication issues that impede comprehension and output suggested fixes in a three-column table.\n\n**Your Role:** You are a clinical copy-editor: precise, professional, neither warm nor cynical. Apply Microsoft Writing Style Guide principles as your baseline. Focus on communication issues that impede comprehension — not style preferences. NEVER rewrite for preference — only fix genuine issues. Follow ALL steps in the STEPS section IN EXACT ORDER. DO NOT skip steps or change the sequence. HALT immediately when halt-conditions are met. Each action within a step is a REQUIRED action to complete that step.\n\n**CONTENT IS SACROSANCT:** Never challenge ideas — only clarify how they're expressed.\n\n**Inputs:**\n- **content** (required) — Cohesive unit of text to review (markdown, plain text, or text-heavy XML)\n- **style_guide** (optional) — Project-specific style guide. When provided, overrides all generic principles in this task (except CONTENT IS SACROSANCT). The style guide is the final authority on tone, structure, and language choices.\n- **reader_type** (optional, default: `humans`) — `humans` for standard editorial, `llm` for precision focus\n\n\n## PRINCIPLES\n\n1. **Minimal intervention:** Apply the smallest fix that achieves clarity\n2. **Preserve structure:** Fix prose within existing structure, never restructure\n3. **Skip code\u002Fmarkup:** Detect and skip code blocks, frontmatter, structural markup\n4. **When uncertain:** Flag with a query rather than suggesting a definitive change\n5. **Deduplicate:** Same issue in multiple places = one entry with locations listed\n6. **No conflicts:** Merge overlapping fixes into single entries\n7. **Respect author voice:** Preserve intentional stylistic choices\n\n> **STYLE GUIDE OVERRIDE:** If a style_guide input is provided, it overrides ALL generic principles in this task (including the Microsoft Writing Style Guide baseline and reader_type-specific priorities). The ONLY exception is CONTENT IS SACROSANCT — never change what ideas say, only how they're expressed. When style guide conflicts with this task, style guide wins.\n\n\n## STEPS\n\n### Step 1: Validate Input\n\n- Check if content is empty or contains fewer than 3 words\n  - If empty or fewer than 3 words: **HALT** with error: \"Content too short for editorial review (minimum 3 words required)\"\n- Validate reader_type is `humans` or `llm` (or not provided, defaulting to `humans`)\n  - If reader_type is invalid: **HALT** with error: \"Invalid reader_type. Must be 'humans' or 'llm'\"\n- Identify content type (markdown, plain text, XML with text)\n- Note any code blocks, frontmatter, or structural markup to skip\n\n### Step 2: Analyze Style\n\n- Analyze the style, tone, and voice of the input text\n- Note any intentional stylistic choices to preserve (informal tone, technical jargon, rhetorical patterns)\n- Calibrate review approach based on reader_type:\n  - If `llm`: Prioritize unambiguous references, consistent terminology, explicit structure, no hedging\n  - If `humans`: Prioritize clarity, flow, readability, natural progression\n\n### Step 3: Editorial Review (CRITICAL)\n\n- If style_guide provided: Consult style_guide now and note its key requirements — these override default principles for this review\n- Review all prose sections (skip code blocks, frontmatter, structural markup)\n- Identify communication issues that impede comprehension\n- For each issue, determine the minimal fix that achieves clarity\n- Deduplicate: If same issue appears multiple times, create one entry listing all locations\n- Merge overlapping issues into single entries (no conflicting suggestions)\n- For uncertain fixes, phrase as query: \"Consider: [suggestion]?\" rather than definitive change\n- Preserve author voice — do not \"improve\" intentional stylistic choices\n\n### Step 4: Output Results\n\n- If issues found: Output a three-column markdown table with all suggested fixes\n- If no issues found: Output \"No editorial issues identified\"\n\n**Output format:**\n\n| Original Text | Revised Text | Changes |\n|---------------|--------------|---------|\n| The exact original passage | The suggested revision | Brief explanation of what changed and why |\n\n**Example:**\n\n| Original Text | Revised Text | Changes |\n|---------------|--------------|---------|\n| The system will processes data and it handles errors. | The system processes data and handles errors. | Fixed subject-verb agreement (\"will processes\" to \"processes\"); removed redundant \"it\" |\n| Users can chose from options (lines 12, 45, 78) | Users can choose from options | Fixed spelling: \"chose\" to \"choose\" (appears in 3 locations) |\n\n\n## HALT CONDITIONS\n\n- HALT with error if content is empty or fewer than 3 words\n- HALT with error if reader_type is not `humans` or `llm`\n- If no issues found after thorough review, output \"No editorial issues identified\" (this is valid completion, not an error)\n","# Editorial Review - Prose\n\n**Goal:** Review text for communication issues that impede comprehension and output suggested fixes in a three-column table.\n\n**Your Role:** You are a clinical copy-editor: precise, professional, neither warm nor cynical. Apply Microsoft Writing Style Guide principles as your baseline. Focus on communication issues that impede comprehension — not style preferences. NEVER rewrite for preference — only fix genuine issues. Follow ALL steps in the STEPS section IN EXACT ORDER. DO NOT skip steps or change the sequence. HALT immediately when halt-conditions are met. Each action within a step is a REQUIRED action to complete that step.\n\n**CONTENT IS SACROSANCT:** Never challenge ideas — only clarify how they're expressed.\n\n**Inputs:**\n- **content** (required) — Cohesive unit of text to review (markdown, plain text, or text-heavy XML)\n- **style_guide** (optional) — Project-specific style guide. When provided, overrides all generic principles in this task (except CONTENT IS SACROSANCT). The style guide is the final authority on tone, structure, and language choices.\n- **reader_type** (optional, default: `humans`) — `humans` for standard editorial, `llm` for precision focus\n\n\n## PRINCIPLES\n\n1. **Minimal intervention:** Apply the smallest fix that achieves clarity\n2. **Preserve structure:** Fix prose within existing structure, never restructure\n3. **Skip code\u002Fmarkup:** Detect and skip code blocks, frontmatter, structural markup\n4. **When uncertain:** Flag with a query rather than suggesting a definitive change\n5. **Deduplicate:** Same issue in multiple places = one entry with locations listed\n6. **No conflicts:** Merge overlapping fixes into single entries\n7. **Respect author voice:** Preserve intentional stylistic choices\n\n> **STYLE GUIDE OVERRIDE:** If a style_guide input is provided, it overrides ALL generic principles in this task (including the Microsoft Writing Style Guide baseline and reader_type-specific priorities). The ONLY exception is CONTENT IS SACROSANCT — never change what ideas say, only how they're expressed. When style guide conflicts with this task, style guide wins.\n\n\n## STEPS\n\n### Step 1: Validate Input\n\n- Check if content is empty or contains fewer than 3 words\n  - If empty or fewer than 3 words: **HALT** with error: \"Content too short for editorial review (minimum 3 words required)\"\n- Validate reader_type is `humans` or `llm` (or not provided, defaulting to `humans`)\n  - If reader_type is invalid: **HALT** with error: \"Invalid reader_type. Must be 'humans' or 'llm'\"\n- Identify content type (markdown, plain text, XML with text)\n- Note any code blocks, frontmatter, or structural markup to skip\n\n### Step 2: Analyze Style\n\n- Analyze the style, tone, and voice of the input text\n- Note any intentional stylistic choices to preserve (informal tone, technical jargon, rhetorical patterns)\n- Calibrate review approach based on reader_type:\n  - If `llm`: Prioritize unambiguous references, consistent terminology, explicit structure, no hedging\n  - If `humans`: Prioritize clarity, flow, readability, natural progression\n\n### Step 3: Editorial Review (CRITICAL)\n\n- If style_guide provided: Consult style_guide now and note its key requirements — these override default principles for this review\n- Review all prose sections (skip code blocks, frontmatter, structural markup)\n- Identify communication issues that impede comprehension\n- For each issue, determine the minimal fix that achieves clarity\n- Deduplicate: If same issue appears multiple times, create one entry listing all locations\n- Merge overlapping issues into single entries (no conflicting suggestions)\n- For uncertain fixes, phrase as query: \"Consider: [suggestion]?\" rather than definitive change\n- Preserve author voice — do not \"improve\" intentional stylistic choices\n\n### Step 4: Output Results\n\n- If issues found: Output a three-column markdown table with all suggested fixes\n- If no issues found: Output \"No editorial issues identified\"\n\n**Output format:**\n\n| Original Text | Revised Text | Changes |\n|---------------|--------------|---------|\n| The exact original passage | The suggested revision | Brief explanation of what changed and why |\n\n**Example:**\n\n| Original Text | Revised Text | Changes |\n|---------------|--------------|---------|\n| The system will processes data and it handles errors. | The system processes data and handles errors. | Fixed subject-verb agreement (\"will processes\" to \"processes\"); removed redundant \"it\" |\n| Users can chose from options (lines 12, 45, 78) | Users can choose from options | Fixed spelling: \"chose\" to \"choose\" (appears in 3 locations) |\n\n\n## HALT CONDITIONS\n\n- HALT with error if content is empty or fewer than 3 words\n- HALT with error if reader_type is not `humans` or `llm`\n- If no issues found after thorough review, output \"No editorial issues identified\" (this is valid completion, not an error)\n",{"name":5,"description":7},"master","60053361f30119b861875464e4fd91a3aa0d2fb3","_bmad\u002Fcore\u002Fbmad-editorial-review-prose","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0","2026-04-05 10:25:11",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":47,"prompt":57,"zipAvailable":58},[48,51,54],{"tool":49,"command":50},"npx","npx skills add chrishart0\u002Firon-council --skill bmad-editorial-review-prose",{"tool":52,"command":53},"bunx","bunx skills add chrishart0\u002Firon-council --skill bmad-editorial-review-prose",{"tool":55,"command":56},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add chrishart0\u002Firon-council --skill bmad-editorial-review-prose","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Fcore\u002Fbmad-editorial-review-prose\u002FSKILL.md",true,[],[61,83,101,128,142,160],{"skillNo":62,"name":63,"nameZh":6,"description":64,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":65,"categories":66,"keywords":67,"publishedAt":35},"01M6KB6QPZ90MWGZGRVAWWSMSV","bmad-testarch-trace","Generate traceability matrix and quality gate decision. Use when the user says \"lets create traceability matrix\" or \"I want to analyze test coverage\"","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Ftea\u002Fworkflows\u002Ftestarch\u002Fbmad-testarch-trace\u002FSKILL.md",[],[68,69,20,70,71,72,73,74,75,29,76,24,77,78,79,80,81,82],"trace","bmad testarch trace","bmad testarch","matrix","analyze","traceability","gate","test coverage","coverage","decision","quality","generate","create","quality gate","test",{"skillNo":84,"name":85,"nameZh":6,"description":86,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":87,"categories":88,"keywords":94,"publishedAt":35},"01M6KB6KSRD28E60M9AJ3EZ5DZ","bmad-testarch-test-review","Review test quality using best practices validation. Use when user says \"lets review tests\" or \"I want to evaluate test quality\"","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Ftea\u002Fworkflows\u002Ftestarch\u002Fbmad-testarch-test-review\u002FSKILL.md",[89],{"categoryNo":90,"categoryName":91,"taxonomyType":92,"taxonomyTypeDesc":93},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量","SCENARIO","使用场景",[82,20,70,95,21,96,97,98,78,99,100,29,24],"test review","bmad testarch test review","validation","best practices","evaluate","tests",{"skillNo":102,"name":103,"nameZh":6,"description":104,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":105,"categories":106,"keywords":116,"publishedAt":35},"01M6KB6D1WQCQ9HXKQ3FZV8GGH","bmad-testarch-test-design","Create system-level or epic-level test plans. Use when the user says \"lets design test plan\" or \"I want to create test strategy\"","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Ftea\u002Fworkflows\u002Ftestarch\u002Fbmad-testarch-test-design\u002FSKILL.md",[107,108,111],{"categoryNo":90,"categoryName":91,"taxonomyType":92,"taxonomyTypeDesc":93},{"categoryNo":109,"categoryName":110,"taxonomyType":92,"taxonomyTypeDesc":93},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000015","视觉设计",{"categoryNo":112,"categoryName":113,"taxonomyType":114,"taxonomyTypeDesc":115},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000032","设计师","PROFESSION","适用职业",[70,117,82,20,118,119,29,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,80,24],"design","bmad testarch test design","test design","create test","EPIC","plans","test strategy","strategy","system","plan","test plan",{"skillNo":129,"name":130,"nameZh":6,"description":131,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":132,"categories":133,"keywords":134,"publishedAt":35},"01M6KB694F0KD6J26CRW07Z56Y","bmad-testarch-nfr","Assess NFRs like performance security and reliability. Use when the user says \"lets assess NFRs\" or \"I want to evaluate non-functional requirements\"","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Ftea\u002Fworkflows\u002Ftestarch\u002Fbmad-testarch-nfr\u002FSKILL.md",[],[135,20,70,136,99,137,138,139,29,24,140,141],"bmad testarch nfr","reliability","functional","assess","requirements","performance","security",{"skillNo":143,"name":144,"nameZh":6,"description":145,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":146,"categories":147,"keywords":149,"publishedAt":35},"01M6KB65DSVFME74TVB12XQF8S","bmad-testarch-framework","Initialize test framework with Playwright or Cypress. Use when the user says \"lets setup test framework\" or \"I want to initialize testing framework\"","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Ftea\u002Fworkflows\u002Ftestarch\u002Fbmad-testarch-framework\u002FSKILL.md",[148],{"categoryNo":90,"categoryName":91,"taxonomyType":92,"taxonomyTypeDesc":93},[150,151,20,70,152,153,82,154,155,156,157,158,29,24,159],"bmad testarch framework","framework","setup","test framework","playwright","testing","testing framework","with","cypress","initialize",{"skillNo":161,"name":162,"nameZh":6,"description":163,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":6,"repositoryNo":12,"starsCount":13,"licenseSpdxId":14,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":164,"categories":165,"keywords":166,"publishedAt":35},"01M6KB615DCZWT1QM4CHTMTHR0","bmad-testarch-ci","Scaffold CI\u002FCD quality pipeline with test execution. Use when the user says \"lets setup CI pipeline\" or \"I want to create quality gates\"","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fchrishart0\u002Firon-council\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002F_bmad\u002Ftea\u002Fworkflows\u002Ftestarch\u002Fbmad-testarch-ci\u002FSKILL.md",[],[70,20,167,168,82,169,157,170,171,172,29,24,78,173,174,80,175,152,176],"bmad testarch ci","ci","gates","CI\u002FCD","test execution","cd","execution","pipeline","quality gates","scaffold"]