agentleFS
athina-aiathina-ai/goose-skills/skills/marketing/make-content-two-pass-edit/SKILL.md

make-content-two-pass-edit

Skill1.3k starsChanged 21 days agoMITView on GitHub

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.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Trending

Quiet since March.thin dataabout the whole repository

Dec 2025: 0 mentionsJan 2026: 0 mentionsFeb 2026: 0 mentionsMar 2026: 1 mentionApr 2026: 0 mentionsMay 2026: 0 mentionsJun 2026: 0 mentionsJul 2026: 0 mentionsAug 2026: 0 mentionsSep 2026: 0 mentionsOct 2026: 0 mentionsNov 2026: 0 mentions
Dec 2025Jun 2026Nov 2026
Mentions a month of the athina-ai/goose-skills repository that our weekly crawl found: only 1 in all, so this is a hint, not a trend. There is no adoption data for this file yet.

Most recently taken up by

Who's talking about athina-ai/goose-skills

The biggest 1 of 1 mention linking to the repository that our crawl found. Each line is their own headline.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Run on every fresh draft, refresh redline and repurposed set.

    line 13
  2. Distinctive:

    Substance pass: Write four answers into the edit note:

    line 15
  3. Distinctive:

    Run the rest of Pass 1 (so-what, proof density, skeptic, order, hedging) as checks.

    line 21
  4. Distinctive:

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

    line 31

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

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.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.