make-content-two-pass-edit

name: make-content-two-pass-editdescription: >-  Edits an existing draft in order: a substance pass (arguable thesis, swap test, fakes removed, CTA  fit), a claims and fact check that cuts or softens unproven lines, a readability and voice-match  pass, then an AI-tell sweep, with an edit note listing open gaps. Use alone when you already have a  finished draft and the brand's voice samples and approved claims; otherwise run make-content.version: 0.1.2

Edit, check, edit

Run on every fresh draft, refresh redline and repurposed set. The full checklists are in ../make-content/references/editing.md.

1. Substance pass. Write four answers into the edit note:

   • the thesis in one arguable sentence;
   • the swap test (pass, or what fails);
   • the fakes removed;
   • whether the CTA matches the intent.

   Run the rest of Pass 1 (so-what, proof density, skeptic, order, hedging) as checks. Fix what fails without writing it up.

2. Claims check: the shared claims gate (the claims-gate skill, ../claims-gate/SKILL.md) for brand claims, plus ../make-content/references/fact-rules.md for world facts, competitor facts, stories, sensitive topics and third-party rights. When the piece is sponsored, affiliate, gifted or a creator collaboration, also load ../ad-policy-check/disclosure.md (in the ad-policy-check skill) and apply it (disclosure in the piece itself, before "more"). It cuts and softens lines, which leaves gaps.

3. Readability pass on the post-cut text: smooth the gaps, headline, lede, H2s as claims, scannability, ending. Then voice match against the best voice sample available, in this order:

   1. the named author's voice card (bylined pieces);
   2. the saved company blog guide brand/voices/blog-<brand-slug>.md for company blog/article work (apply its rules and bans; keep any provisional status);
   3. the kit’s voice example lines;
   4. the brand's own post captions (brand_read organic);
   5. "From the site" lines in product notes;
   6. three lines the human pastes on request.

   If none exist, write "voice unmatched: no real samples" in the note and keep the copy plain rather than guessing at personality.

4. AI-tell check (mechanical) on the final text. Anything the brand's real writing uses stays; with no real samples, everything on the list goes.

Edit note (attached to the piece)

Edit note — <title>
Thesis: … · Swap test: pass | fails because … → fixed by … | still fails (see top) · Fakes removed: … · CTA fits intent: yes/no
Voice matched against: <source> | voice unmatched
AI-tells removed: <list with counts>
Open gaps: [PROOF NEEDED …] [STORY NEEDED …] [FOUNDER: …] [CUSTOMER APPROVAL NEEDED …]

If the swap test still fails after the substance pass (no brand-specific proof or POV exists), the piece can still be delivered, but the first line must say "Generic: no brand-specific proof or POV available. This would fix it: …". Never hide it. If most of the piece would be gaps, the proof gate in SKILL.md step 4 applies: stop at the brief.