Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Copy-edits text for clarity, consistency, and style beyond proofreading: tightens prose, enforces tone, flags substantive issues.
npx claudepluginhub ur-grue/autopunk-media-skills --plugin autopunk-media-skillsHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/autopunk-media-skills:copy-editorThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Copy-edit a piece of text for clarity, consistency, style, and readability — going beyond proofreading to tighten prose, improve sentence structure, and enforce consistent style throughout, while flagging substantive issues for the author's attention.
Reviews prose for communication issues that impede comprehension, applying minimal fixes and Microsoft Writing Style Guide principles. Useful for improving clarity in markdown, plain text, or text-heavy XML.
Reviews a draft article and returns a structured list of grammatical errors, style inconsistencies, and clarity issues with suggested corrections and rationales.
Reviews prose for communication issues impeding comprehension, outputs minimal fixes in a three-column table per Microsoft Writing Style Guide. Useful for 'review prose' or 'improve prose' requests.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Copy-edit a piece of text for clarity, consistency, style, and readability — going beyond proofreading to tighten prose, improve sentence structure, and enforce consistent style throughout, while flagging substantive issues for the author's attention.
Required: The text to edit; the publication context (news article, magazine feature, web, academic, broadcast script, newsletter).
Optional: House style guide reference or key style rules (e.g. "AP style", "sentence-case headings only", "no Oxford comma"); target reading level (general public, specialist, executive); specific concerns to address ("too many passive constructions", "inconsistent tense throughout", "paragraph three is unclear").
Two sections:
Edited text — the full text with all copy-editing changes applied. Changes are made inline; no track-changes markup unless the author requests it.
Editorial note — three to five bullet points (50–100 words total) summarising: (a) the recurring patterns found and addressed, (b) any substantive issues flagged for the author that were not silently edited, (c) any remaining concerns if the text would benefit from further work.
Text:
Streaming platforms are now offering original documentary content at a scale which was previously unthinkable, according to industry analysts. In the past, documentary filmmakers would have relied on broadcaster commissions in order to fund their projects. But the landscape had shifted. Three major platforms have increased their documentary budgets by an average of 40% over the last two years, data from a trade association shows. Filmmakers are now finding that the pitching process is becoming more competitive, and it was being noted by several producers who were interviewed for this piece that the approval cycles are getting longer. The question of whether this benefits independent filmmakers or primarily consolidates power in the hands of platform commissioning editors is one that remains deeply contested.
Publication context: Web, general audience
Edited text:
Streaming platforms are now commissioning original documentary content at a scale previously unthinkable, according to industry analysts. Traditionally, documentary filmmakers depended on broadcaster commissions to fund their work — but that landscape has changed. Three major platforms have increased their documentary budgets by an average of 40% over the past two years, according to trade association data.
The pitching process has grown more competitive. Several producers interviewed for this piece said approval cycles are getting longer. Whether this benefits independent filmmakers — or simply consolidates power in the hands of platform commissioning editors — remains contested.
Editorial note: