Proofreader Review Checklist
Overview
This skill provides structured checklists for proofreading and reviewing writing workspace documents. It adapts to the document type — manuscript chapters, outlines, proposals, query letters, character sheets, and more — so every review is focused and consistent.
Onboarding
No setup required. When the user shares a document to review, begin by identifying what kind of document it is:
Ask the user: "What type of document are you reviewing? (manuscript chapter, outline/beat sheet, query letter/synopsis, book proposal, or character sheet/world-building doc)"
Then apply the relevant checklist below.
Checklists by Document Type
Manuscript Chapter (fiction or technical)
1. Mechanical
- Spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors
- Consistent punctuation style throughout (Oxford comma, em-dash vs en-dash, curly vs straight quotes)
- No stray formatting artifacts (double spaces, broken markdown, mismatched italics)
2. Voice & Consistency
- Tense is consistent throughout the chapter
- POV is maintained — no unintended head-hopping in single-POV chapters
- Character names, place names, and proper nouns spelled consistently
- Technical terms or invented vocabulary match usage in earlier chapters
3. Continuity
- Timeline aligns with the outline and earlier chapters
- Character attributes (appearance, age, relationships, traits) match established character sheets
- World-building rules are not violated
- The chapter's end state is consistent with where the next chapter begins
4. Clarity
- Sentences read smoothly when read aloud
- Ambiguous pronouns are resolved (it's clear who "he" or "she" refers to)
- Scene transitions are clearly marked and easy to follow
- Dialogue attribution is unambiguous
5. Structure
- Scene breaks are correctly marked (e.g.,
--- or * * *)
- Chapter opens with a hook or re-entry point that draws the reader in
- Paragraph breaks are appropriate — no walls of text, no excessive fragmentation
- Formatting matches the manuscript's established conventions
Outline or Beat Sheet
1. Completeness
- All major plot or structural points are present
- Character arcs are tracked through each beat or chapter
- Each scene or chapter entry has a stated dramatic purpose
2. Consistency
- Character motivations are consistent beat to beat
- Timeline is plausible (no impossible travel, implausible time compression)
- Stakes escalate in the right direction toward the climax
3. Formatting
- Outline format is consistent throughout (headings, numbering, indentation)
- Chapter or scene labels are consistent
- No orphaned beats that lack context or connection to adjacent entries
Query Letter or Synopsis
1. Mechanical
- No spelling or grammar errors
- Word or page count is within the submission guidelines for the target agent or publisher
2. Pitch Quality
- Hook lands in the first sentence — the premise is clear and compelling immediately
- Protagonist, goal, conflict, and stakes are all present and legible
- Voice matches the manuscript's register (a quiet literary novel shouldn't have a punchy thriller query)
- Comp titles are current (within 3–5 years) and accurately comparable in tone, audience, and sales tier
3. Consistency
- Character names match the manuscript exactly
- Plot summary accurately reflects the manuscript's events — no invented or missing plot points
- Stated genre, word count, and age category match the manuscript
Book Proposal (technical or narrative non-fiction)
1. Mechanical
- No spelling or grammar errors
- All required sections are present: overview, audience, competitive analysis, TOC, author bio, sample chapter (or equivalent for the publisher)
2. Market Accuracy
- Comp titles are current, appropriately scoped, and not too famous or too obscure
- Audience definition is specific and credible — not "anyone interested in X"
- Any market data or statistics cited are recent and sourced
3. Internal Consistency
- Chapter summaries align with the proposed table of contents
- Author bio claims (platform size, credentials, previous publications) are accurate and verifiable
- The scope described in the overview matches the detailed outline — no over-promising
Character Sheet or World-Building Document
1. Completeness
- All required fields are filled for the template in use
- Any gaps are flagged for the author to resolve — not silently skipped
2. Internal Consistency
- No contradictions within the document (age doesn't conflict with birth year, two characters don't share the same unique backstory detail)
- Relationships are reciprocal where expected (if A is B's mentor, B should reference A as their student)
3. Consistency with Manuscript
- Details match what has appeared in chapters so far
- Any discrepancy between the sheet and the manuscript is flagged — the author decides which is canonical
Best Practices
- Review one document type at a time; don't mix chapter proofreading with outline review in the same pass
- Check against source documents (outline, character sheets, established manuscript chapters) rather than from memory
- Flag continuity issues for the author's decision — don't silently "fix" lore
- Distinguish mechanical errors (correct them directly) from stylistic choices (flag with a note explaining the concern)
- Be specific: cite the exact passage or line, not just the category of problem
- When uncertain whether something is an error or an intentional choice, ask before changing it