Copy Editing Sweep

---
name: copy-editing-sweep
description: "Use when existing marketing or sales copy needs to be tightened, clarified or made more persuasive without rewriting it from scratch. Runs focused editing passes for clarity, specificity, voice, proof, structure and polish, keeps the author's intent, and returns the edited copy with a change log explaining the significant edits."
license: MIT
metadata:
  title: "Copy Editing Sweep"
  category: "content-copy"
  author: "carolina"
  summary: "Edit existing copy in focused passes for clarity, specificity, voice, proof and flow, with a change log that explains every major edit."
  tags: "copy editing, editing, clarity, voice, proofreading"
  version: "1.0"
  updated: "2026-10-19"
---
# Copy Editing Sweep

This skill improves copy that already exists. It works in separate passes, each looking for one kind of problem, which catches far more than a single read-through. The author's message and intent stay intact; the edit makes them sharper.

## When to use

- A draft page, email, post, one-pager or deck needs polishing before publishing.
- Copy feels long, vague or generic, but the structure is roughly right.
- Several people wrote parts of a document and the voice is uneven.
- A piece needs to sound less automated and more like a person wrote it.

If the copy has the wrong strategy (wrong audience, wrong offer), say so and recommend a rewrite instead of polishing.

## What you need

Ask for these first:

1. **The copy** in full.
2. **Purpose and audience:** what the piece should make the reader think or do.
3. **Format and constraints:** channel, word limits, character limits, required terms or legal lines.
4. **Voice guidance:** brand voice notes or an example of copy the team considers on-voice.
5. **Edit depth:** light (polish only), medium (tighten and clarify), or heavy (restructure allowed).

## Process

Run these passes in order. Later passes assume earlier fixes are done.

1. **Purpose pass.** Read the whole piece once. Write one sentence stating what it is trying to achieve. If any section does not serve that sentence, flag it for cutting or moving.
2. **Clarity pass.** Find sentences a reader would have to read twice. Split long sentences, put the subject and verb early, replace abstract nouns with verbs ("make a decision" becomes "decide"), and define or remove jargon.
3. **Specificity pass.** Hunt vague words: "solutions", "streamline", "robust", "seamless", "various", "significant". Replace each with a concrete detail (what exactly, how much, for whom) or cut it. If the specific fact is not available, mark a placeholder like [specific result needed] instead of inventing one.
4. **Reader pass.** Shift focus from the company to the reader. Count "we/our" versus "you/your" in key sections. Turn features into outcomes where it helps the reader understand why something matters.
5. **Proof pass.** Underline every claim. Each needs support nearby (a number, an example, a quote) or softer wording. Remove superlatives that cannot be backed up.
6. **Voice pass.** Align tone with the guidance: contractions or not, formality, sentence rhythm. Remove patterns that make text sound machine-written: stacked adjectives, "not only X but also Y" constructions repeated, lists of exactly three everywhere, empty openers like "In today's fast-paced world", and filler transitions.
7. **Structure pass.** Check headings, paragraph length and order. Headings should carry meaning when skimmed. Put the most important point first in each section.
8. **Polish pass.** Grammar, spelling, punctuation, consistent capitalization, number formatting, product name consistency, and broken parallelism in lists. Check any calls to action say what happens next.
9. **Length check.** Check the final length against the channel's real constraint (character limits, the space a layout allows, how long the reader has) and against what the reader needs to act. Report the change from the original as an observation, never a target: a sweep that removes padding may cut a lot, while one that adds missing proof or a clear next step may make copy longer.

## Output format

```
Edited copy
[full edited text]

Change log (significant edits only)
| # | Original | Edited | Pass | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|

Flags for the author
- Claims that need proof: ...
- Placeholders inserted: ...
- Sections recommended for cutting or moving: ...
- Strategic concerns (if any): ...

Length: [original words] -> [edited words]
```

## Quality checklist

- The edited copy still says what the author meant; no new claims were invented.
- Every vague term was made specific, cut, or flagged with a placeholder.
- Claims without proof are softened or flagged.
- Voice matches the guidance consistently from start to finish.
- The change log explains significant edits so the author can accept or reject them.
- Constraints (length, required terms, legal text) are respected.

## Common mistakes

- **Rewriting instead of editing.** Replacing the author's voice with your own makes the edit hard to accept and loses context only the author had.
- **Inventing specifics.** Making up a percentage to replace "significant" is worse than the vague word. Use placeholders.
- **One pass for everything.** Reading once for all problems misses most of them; focused passes are faster overall.
- **Polishing a strategic problem.** Beautiful sentences aimed at the wrong audience still fail. Flag it.
- **Over-trimming.** Cutting every transition can make copy choppy. Brevity serves clarity, not the reverse.
- **No explanation.** Edits without reasons are harder to learn from and easier to reject.

## Example prompts

- "Edit this landing page copy for clarity and specificity. Keep the structure."
- "Tighten this cold email to under 90 words without losing the proof point."
- "This blog post sounds AI-written. Edit it so it sounds like an experienced practitioner."
- "Do a light polish on this one-pager and flag any claims we can't back up."
- "Three people wrote this proposal. Make the voice consistent and give me a change log."