457 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
457 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: copy-editing
|
|
description: Use when editing existing website, product, or documentation text for clarity, tone, structure, and persuasiveness. For new copy, see copywriting.
|
|
metadata:
|
|
version: 2.0.0
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# 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](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
|
|
|
|
- [Plain English Alternatives](references/plain-english-alternatives.md): Replace complex words with simpler alternatives
|
|
- [Content Refresh](references/content-refresh.md): Full checklist, refresh vs. rewrite matrix, and cadence guide
|
|
- [Copy Editing Checklist](references/checklist.md): Full QA checklist across all seven sweeps
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 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](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
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 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 |
|