Edit the writing below as a careful human editor, not a ghostwriter. Preserve my meaning, factual claims, level of certainty, and intended audience. Do not add examples, research, quotations, sources, achievements, or opinions that are not already supported by my draft or notes. WRITING TO EDIT: [DRAFT] INTENDED READER: [AUDIENCE] INTENDED TONE: [TONE] PURPOSE AND NON-NEGOTIABLE POINTS: [PURPOSE AND KEY POINTS] HOUSE STYLE OR CONSTRAINTS: [STYLE CONSTRAINTS]
First, identify the draft's central claim or request and the 3-5 points that must survive the edit. Then produce: 1. A clean edited version, preserving the original structure unless reorganizing materially improves logic. Keep roughly the same length unless I ask otherwise. 2. A brief change log with sections for clarity, structure, tone, and correctness. Explain only consequential edits. 3. A short list titled "Questions or risks" for ambiguous references, unsupported claims, factual inconsistencies, missing transitions, or tone problems that cannot be safely solved by editing. Editing standards: cut throat-clearing and repeated ideas; put subjects and actions close together; replace vague referents such as "this" when the antecedent is unclear; use active voice where it clarifies responsibility; keep technical terms that the audience needs; retain deliberate rhetorical choices; and make lists parallel. Correct grammar, punctuation, capitalization, and obvious word-choice errors in the specified language variant. Before answering, self-check that every material fact, number, quote, and commitment remains supported by the input. Also compare the edited version against the non-negotiable points and flag anything that was omitted or softened. Ask up to 3 clarifying questions only if a required input is missing.
Fill in
| Placeholder | What to enter | Example |
|---|---|---|
| [DRAFT] | Paste the complete text you want edited. | Our onboarding has improved a lot, but there are still issues with getting new hires access to the tools they need. |
| [AUDIENCE] | Name the people who will read it and their relevant context. | Department heads deciding whether to fund an IT access project |
| [TONE] | Describe the intended voice, such as warm and direct or formal and neutral. | Direct, practical, and non-accusatory |
| [PURPOSE AND KEY POINTS] | State what the writing must accomplish and the points that cannot change. | Request approval for a pilot; retain the facts that access delays affect first-week productivity and managers currently track requests manually. |
| [STYLE CONSTRAINTS] | Add length, spelling convention, formatting, or house-style requirements. | US English; keep under 300 words; use short paragraphs |
How to use
- Paste the full draft rather than isolated sentences so the editor can preserve its logic and transitions.
- State what cannot change, especially numbers, quotes, promises, legal language, and the desired level of formality.
- Check the change log for edits that alter emphasis or responsibility before using the clean version.
- Follow up with: "Show a tracked-style table with original wording, revised wording, and a reason for each material change."
Variations
Line edit
Use this when the structure is sound and you want sentence-level polish only.
Line-edit [DRAFT] for grammar, punctuation, syntax, concision, and word choice. Preserve every fact, paragraph order, claim, and degree of certainty. Return (1) the edited text and (2) a table of only material changes with original, revision, and reason. Follow [STYLE GUIDE] and write for [AUDIENCE]. Do not rewrite for a different argument or add facts. Before answering, verify that every number, name, quote, and commitment matches the source. Ask up to 3 questions only if a required input is missing.
Tone adjustment
Use this when the content is right but the voice is too blunt, stiff, or informal.
Rewrite [DRAFT] for [AUDIENCE] in a [TARGET TONE] voice while retaining the exact request, facts, deadlines, and commitments. Keep it within [LENGTH LIMIT]. Return the rewrite followed by five bullets identifying any phrasing that could still be read as too strong, vague, or ambiguous. Do not add praise, apologies, explanations, or facts absent from the source. Self-check that the call to action and all dates and numbers are unchanged. Ask up to 3 questions only if required information is missing.
Developmental edit
Use this before a major rewrite of a memo, article, or proposal.
Give a developmental edit of [DRAFT] for [AUDIENCE] to achieve [GOAL]. Do not rewrite the whole piece. Return: a one-sentence thesis, an outline of the current logic, the three highest-impact structural problems, a prioritized revision plan, and a proposed outline. Identify where evidence is missing or claims outrun the supplied material. Respect [CONSTRAINTS]. Before answering, check that recommendations distinguish clarity problems from factual gaps. Ask up to 3 questions only if a required input is missing.
Tips
- Keep a source version untouched; an AI editor can make a sentence smoother while subtly changing who is responsible for an action.
- For sensitive writing, name phrases that must remain verbatim, including contractual language, quoted feedback, product names, and approved claims.
- Ask for a change log when editing more than a short note, because it exposes meaning shifts that are easy to miss in a polished rewrite.
- If the piece has a style guide, paste its relevant rules rather than asking the model to imitate a publication from memory.
FAQ
Will this prompt preserve my voice?
It directs the model to preserve your meaning and tone, but you should still compare the clean copy with your draft, especially in personal or persuasive writing.
Can I use it for academic or legal writing?
Yes for editing clarity and mechanics, but verify citations, quotations, authorities, and technical claims against original sources. It should not be treated as expert review.
Should I paste confidential material?
Follow your organization's AI and data-handling policy, and remove private, client, or identifying details when required.