AGENT SKILL

copy-editing

Use when editing or reviewing existing marketing copy through seven focused sweeps: clarity, voice, so-what, proof, specificity, emotion and zero risk. Preserves the core message and author voice; for writing new page copy use copywriting.

License 许可
MIT
所属仓库
monoes/monomind
最近更新
2026-11-14
Stars
★ 23
Forks
2

01 前言 Front Matter

name
copy-editing
tags
[ "marketing", "writing", "copywriting", "content" ]
tools
[]
source
https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills
license
MIT
description
Use when editing or reviewing existing marketing copy through seven focused sweeps: clarity, voice, so-what, proof, specificity, emotion and zero risk. Preserves the core message and author voice; for writing new page copy use copywriting.
source_path
skills/copy-editing
source_commit
5b2c0007766c6a1cf1d53fd8fc73e979e0821022

02 资源文件 4

03 SKILL.md 正文

Copy Editing

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.

Core Philosophy

Check for product marketing context first: If .agents/product-marketing.md exists (or .claude/product-marketing.md, or the legacy product-marketing-context.md filename, in older setups), read it before editing. Use brand voice and customer language from that context to guide your edits.

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.

Key principles:

  • Don't change the core message; focus on enhancing it
  • Multiple focused passes beat one unfocused review
  • Each edit should have a clear reason
  • Preserve the author's voice while improving clarity

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

Focus: Can the reader understand what you're saying?

What to check:

  • Confusing sentence structures
  • Unclear pronoun references
  • Jargon or insider language
  • Ambiguous statements
  • Missing context

Common clarity killers:

  • Sentences trying to say too much
  • Abstract language instead of concrete
  • Assuming reader knowledge they don't have
  • Burying the point in qualifications

Process:

  1. Read through quickly, highlighting unclear parts
  2. Don't correct yet—just note problem areas
  3. After marking issues, recommend specific edits
  4. Verify edits maintain the original intent

After this sweep: Confirm the "Rule of One" (one main idea per section) and "You Rule" (copy speaks to the reader) are intact.


Sweep 2: Voice and Tone

Focus: Is the copy consistent in how it sounds?

What to check:

  • Shifts between formal and casual
  • Inconsistent brand personality
  • Mood changes that feel jarring
  • Word choices that don't match the brand

Common voice issues:

  • Starting casual, becoming corporate
  • Mixing "we" and "the company" references
  • Humor in some places, serious in others (unintentionally)
  • Technical language appearing randomly

Process:

  1. Read aloud to hear inconsistencies
  2. Mark where tone shifts unexpectedly
  3. Recommend edits that smooth transitions
  4. Ensure personality remains throughout

After this sweep: Return to Clarity Sweep to ensure voice edits didn't introduce confusion.


Sweep 3: So What

Focus: Does every claim answer "why should I care?"

What to check:

  • Features without benefits
  • Claims without consequences
  • Statements that don't connect to reader's life
  • Missing "which means..." bridges

The So What test: For every statement, ask "Okay, so what?" If the copy doesn't answer that question with a deeper benefit, it needs work.

❌ "Our platform uses AI-powered analytics" So what? ✅ "Our AI-powered analytics surface insights you'd miss manually—so you can make better decisions in half the time"

Common So What failures:

  • Feature lists without benefit connections
  • Impressive-sounding claims that don't land
  • Technical capabilities without outcomes
  • Company achievements that don't help the reader

Process:

  1. Read each claim and literally ask "so what?"
  2. Highlight claims missing the answer
  3. Add the benefit bridge or deeper meaning
  4. Ensure benefits connect to real reader desires

After this sweep: Return to Voice and Tone, then Clarity.


Sweep 4: Prove It

Focus: Is every claim supported with evidence?

What to check:

  • Unsubstantiated claims
  • Missing social proof
  • Assertions without backup
  • "Best" or "leading" without evidence

Types of proof to look for:

  • Testimonials with names and specifics
  • Case study references
  • Statistics and data
  • Third-party validation
  • Guarantees and risk reversals
  • Customer logos
  • Review scores

Common proof gaps:

  • "Trusted by thousands" (which thousands?)
  • "Industry-leading" (according to whom?)
  • "Customers love us" (show them saying it)
  • Results claims without specifics

Process:

  1. Identify every claim that needs proof
  2. Check if proof exists nearby
  3. Flag unsupported assertions
  4. Recommend adding proof or softening claims

After this sweep: Return to So What, Voice and Tone, then Clarity.


Sweep 5: Specificity

Focus: Is the copy concrete enough to be compelling?

What to check:

  • Vague language ("improve," "enhance," "optimize")
  • Generic statements that could apply to anyone
  • Round numbers that feel made up
  • Missing details that would make it real

Specificity upgrades:

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

Common specificity issues:

  • Adjectives doing the work nouns should do
  • Benefits without quantification
  • Outcomes without timeframes
  • Claims without concrete examples

Process:

  1. Highlight vague words and phrases
  2. Ask "Can this be more specific?"
  3. Add numbers, timeframes, or examples
  4. Remove content that can't be made specific (it's probably filler)

After this sweep: Return to Prove It, So What, Voice and Tone, then Clarity.


Sweep 6: Heightened Emotion

Focus: Does the copy make the reader feel something?

What to check:

  • Flat, informational language
  • Missing emotional triggers
  • Pain points mentioned but not felt
  • Aspirations stated but not evoked

Emotional dimensions to consider:

  • Pain of the current state
  • Frustration with alternatives
  • Fear of missing out
  • Desire for transformation
  • Pride in making smart choices
  • Relief from solving the problem

Techniques for heightening emotion:

  • Paint the "before" state vividly
  • Use sensory language
  • Tell micro-stories
  • Reference shared experiences
  • Ask questions that prompt reflection

Process:

  1. Read for emotional impact—does it move you?
  2. Identify flat sections that should resonate
  3. Add emotional texture while staying authentic
  4. Ensure emotion serves the message (not manipulation)

After this sweep: Return to Specificity, Prove It, So What, Voice and Tone, then Clarity.


Sweep 7: Zero Risk

Focus: Have we removed every barrier to action?

What to check:

  • Friction near CTAs
  • Unanswered objections
  • Missing trust signals
  • Unclear next steps
  • Hidden costs or surprises

Risk reducers to look for:

  • Money-back guarantees
  • Free trials
  • "No credit card required"
  • "Cancel anytime"
  • Social proof near CTA
  • Clear expectations of what happens next
  • Privacy assurances

Common risk issues:

  • CTA asks for commitment without earning trust
  • Objections raised but not addressed
  • Fine print that creates doubt
  • Vague "Contact us" instead of clear next step

Process:

  1. Focus on sections near CTAs
  2. List every reason someone might hesitate
  3. Check if the copy addresses each concern
  4. Add risk reversals or trust signals as needed

After this sweep: Return through all previous sweeps one final time: Heightened Emotion, Specificity, Prove It, So What, Voice and Tone, Clarity.


Expert Panel Scoring

Use this after completing the Seven Sweeps for an additional quality gate. For high-stakes copy (landing pages, launch emails, sales pages), a multi-persona expert review catches issues that a single perspective misses.

How It Works

  1. Assemble 3-5 expert personas relevant to the copy type
  2. Each persona scores the copy 1-10 on their area of expertise
  3. Collect specific critiques — not just scores, but what to fix
  4. Revise based on feedback — address the lowest-scoring areas first
  5. Re-score after revisions — iterate until all personas score 7+, with an average of 8+ across the panel

Recommended Expert Panels

Landing page copy:

  • Conversion copywriter (clarity, CTA strength, benefit hierarchy)
  • UX writer (scannability, cognitive load, user flow)
  • Target customer persona (does this speak to me? do I trust it?)
  • Brand strategist (voice consistency, positioning accuracy)

Email sequence:

  • Email marketing specialist (subject lines, open/click optimization)
  • Copywriter (hooks, storytelling, persuasion)
  • Spam filter analyst (deliverability red flags, trigger words)
  • Target customer persona (relevance, value, unsubscribe risk)

Sales page / long-form:

  • Direct response copywriter (offer structure, objection handling, urgency)
  • Skeptical buyer persona (proof gaps, trust issues, red flags)
  • Editor (flow, readability, conciseness)
  • SEO specialist (keyword coverage, search intent alignment)

Scoring Rubric

Score Meaning
9-10 Publish-ready. No meaningful improvements.
7-8 Strong. Minor tweaks only.
5-6 Functional but has clear gaps. Needs another pass.
3-4 Significant issues. Major revision needed.
1-2 Fundamentally broken. Rethink approach.

When to Use

  • Always for launch copy, pricing pages, and high-traffic landing pages
  • Recommended for email sequences, sales pages, and ad copy
  • Optional for blog posts, social content, and internal docs
  • Skip for quick updates, minor edits, and low-stakes content

Quick-Pass Editing Checks

Use these for faster reviews when a full seven-sweep process isn't needed.

Word-Level Checks

Cut these words:

  • Very, really, extremely, incredibly (weak intensifiers)
  • Just, actually, basically (filler)
  • In order to (use "to")
  • That (often unnecessary)
  • Things, stuff (vague)

Replace these:

Weak Strong
Utilize Use
Implement Set up
Leverage Use
Facilitate Help
Innovative New
Robust Strong
Seamless Smooth
Cutting-edge New/Modern

Watch for:

  • Adverbs (usually unnecessary)
  • Passive voice (switch to active)
  • Nominalizations (verb → noun: "make a decision" → "decide")

Sentence-Level Checks

  • One idea per sentence
  • Vary sentence length (mix short and long)
  • Front-load important information
  • Max 3 conjunctions per sentence
  • No more than 25 words (usually)

Paragraph-Level Checks

  • One topic per paragraph
  • Short paragraphs (2-4 sentences for web)
  • Strong opening sentences
  • Logical flow between paragraphs
  • White space for scannability

Copy Editing Checklist

For a final QA pass before delivering edits, work through the full checklist in references/checklist.md — covering all seven sweeps plus pre-start and final-check items.


Common Copy Problems & Fixes

Problem: Wall of Features

Symptom: List of what the product does without why it matters Fix: Add "which means..." after each feature to bridge to benefits

Problem: Corporate Speak

Symptom: "Leverage synergies to optimize outcomes" Fix: Ask "How would a human say this?" and use those words

Problem: Weak Opening

Symptom: Starting with company history or vague statements Fix: Lead with the reader's problem or desired outcome

Problem: Buried CTA

Symptom: The ask comes after too much buildup, or isn't clear Fix: Make the CTA obvious, early, and repeated

Problem: No Proof

Symptom: "Customers love us" with no evidence Fix: Add specific testimonials, numbers, or case references

Problem: Generic Claims

Symptom: "We help businesses grow" Fix: Specify who, how, and by how much

Problem: Mixed Audiences

Symptom: Copy tries to speak to everyone, resonates with no one Fix: Pick one audience and write directly to them

Problem: Feature Overload

Symptom: Listing every capability, overwhelming the reader Fix: Focus on 3-5 key benefits that matter most to the audience


Working with Copy Sweeps

When editing collaboratively:

  1. Run a sweep and present findings - Show what you found, why it's an issue
  2. Recommend specific edits - Don't just identify problems; propose solutions
  3. Request the updated copy - Let the author make final decisions
  4. Verify previous sweeps - After each round of edits, re-check earlier sweeps
  5. Repeat until clean - Continue until a full sweep finds no new issues

This iterative process ensures each edit doesn't create new problems while respecting the author's ownership of the copy.


References


Content Refresh Editing

Copy editing isn't just for new content. Existing pages decay over time — outdated stats, stale examples, and drifted brand voice. Use the content refresh framework when traffic is declining, data is stale, or the product has changed.

For the full refresh checklist, refresh vs. rewrite decision matrix, and cadence guide: See references/content-refresh.md


Task-Specific Questions

  1. What's the goal of this copy? (Awareness, conversion, retention)
  2. What action should readers take?
  3. Are there specific concerns or known issues?
  4. What proof/evidence do you have available?
  5. Is this new copy or a refresh of existing content?

Related Skills

  • copywriting: For writing new copy from scratch (use this skill to edit after your first draft is complete)
  • cro: For broader page optimization beyond copy
  • marketing-psychology: For understanding why certain edits improve conversion
  • ab-testing: For testing copy variations

When to Use Each Skill

Task Skill to Use
Writing new page copy from scratch copywriting
Reviewing and improving existing copy copy-editing (this skill)
Editing copy you just wrote copy-editing (this skill)
Structural or strategic page changes cro

04 同仓库更多 Skills

monoes
monoes/monomind

zk-steward

Org role guidance for a ZK steward: engineer zero-knowledge proof systems with circuit design, SNARK vs STARK choice and security review. This is zero-knowledge cryptography, not Zettelkasten note-taking.

★ 23
monoes
monoes/monomind

writing-plans

Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step coding task and must write an implementation plan before touching code. Produces bite-sized TDD tasks with exact file paths, code and commands for an engineer with zero context.

内容创作者写作与文案
★ 23
monoes
monoes/monomind

write-spec

Write a feature spec or PRD from a problem statement or feature idea. Use when turning a vague idea or user request into a structured document, scoping a feature with goals and non-goals, defining success metrics and acceptance criteria, or breaking a big ask into a phased spec.

产品经理
★ 23
monoes
monoes/monomind

write-query

Write optimized SQL for your dialect with best practices. Use when translating a natural-language data need into SQL, building a multi-CTE query with joins and aggregations, optimizing a query against a large partitioned table, or getting dialect-specific syntax for Snowflake, BigQuery, Postgres, etc.

数据分析师
★ 23
monoes
monoes/monomind

workflow-automation

Org role guidance for workflow automation: build and maintain CI/CD definitions in GitHub Actions or equivalent: triggers, jobs, matrices, caching. Covers path filters, dependency caching, parallel jobs, timeouts and fail-fast ordering.

运维与部署Skill与智能体开发
★ 23
monoes
monoes/monomind

workflow-architect

Org role guidance for a workflow architect: map full workflow trees for systems, user journeys and agents, covering every branch and failure. Covers discovering workflows from code, handoff contracts, timeouts, recovery paths and observable state.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 23