Smithery is now a part of Arcade.dev! Read more in our announcement here
Comprehensive editing framework covering voice consistency, timeline verification, citation coverage, and multi-pass editing strategies for autonomous manuscript refinement.
This skill provides comprehensive guidance for autonomous editing of manuscripts, covering multiple editing passes, consistency checks, and quality assurance.
Editing for autonomous book writing requires systematic, database-backed verification rather than subjective judgment. Every editing pass should query the corpus to enforce consistency against established facts, voice, and timeline.
Focus: Large-scale issues that affect narrative or argument coherence.
Checks:
Queries: See consistency-check.surql for database queries.
Focus: Maintaining consistent voice and improving prose quality.
Checks:
Guidance: See style.md for line-level editing techniques.
Focus: Ensuring all factual claims are properly sourced.
Checks:
Queries:
-- Find sections with factual claims but no citations
SELECT * FROM section
WHERE content ~ 'factual_pattern'
AND count(->cites->source) = 0;
Focus: Micro-level consistency across the manuscript.
Checks:
Guidance: See continuity.md for detailed continuity checking.
Before editing any section, gather full context:
-- Get section content
SELECT * FROM section WHERE id = $section_id;
-- Get BRD voice profile
SELECT * FROM brd ORDER BY version DESC LIMIT 1;
-- Get recent sections for voice calibration
SELECT content FROM section
WHERE chapter = $chapter_id
ORDER BY sequence DESC
LIMIT 3;
Execute automated consistency queries from consistency-check.surql:
For each issue found, create structured report:
## Edit Report: [Section ID]
### Structural Issues
- [ ] Character:anna appears in section 47 but status='dead' since section 32
- [ ] Location:safehouse used but not introduced
### Voice Issues
- [ ] Sentence length avg 8 words (BRD target: 15-20)
- [ ] Formal vocabulary in conversational narrative
### Citation Issues
- [ ] "SOE training took 6 weeks" - uncited factual claim
- [ ] Source reliability: 2 low-reliability sources used
### Continuity Issues
- [ ] Character description: "blue eyes" conflicts with section 12 "brown eyes"
- [ ] Timeline: Event dated "August 1943" conflicts with chapter 2 "September 1942"
Depending on mode:
After applying fixes, re-run consistency checks to ensure issues resolved.
Voice must match the BRD voice profile across all sections.
From BRD voice profile:
-- Get voice profile from BRD
SELECT
narrative_pov,
tense,
overall_tone,
formality_level,
avg_sentence_length,
vocabulary_level,
metaphor_frequency,
dialogue_ratio
FROM brd
ORDER BY version DESC
LIMIT 1;
-- Compare section metrics to profile
-- (requires text analysis, typically LLM-based)
For each section, analyze:
Timeline consistency is critical for both fiction and nonfiction.
-- Get all events in chronological order
SELECT * FROM event ORDER BY sequence ASC;
-- Find timeline contradictions
SELECT e1.name AS earlier_event, e2.name AS later_event
FROM event e1, event e2
WHERE e1.sequence > e2.sequence
AND e1.date < e2.date;
-- Verify character availability
SELECT
section.id AS section_id,
character.name AS character_name,
character.status
FROM section->appears_in->character
WHERE character.status = 'dead'
AND section.sequence > (
SELECT sequence FROM event
WHERE name LIKE '%death of ' + character.name
LIMIT 1
);
When timeline issues found:
Every factual claim must be traceable to a source.
Factual claims include:
-- Find sections with no citations (potential issue)
SELECT id, content FROM section
WHERE count(->cites->source) = 0;
-- Find low citation density
SELECT
id,
word_count,
count(->cites->source) AS citation_count,
word_count / count(->cites->source) AS words_per_citation
FROM section
WHERE word_count / count(->cites->source) > 500;
Verify citations meet standards:
See continuity.md for detailed continuity verification:
| Issue Type | Severity | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Dead character appears | Critical | Auto-fix (remove) or flag |
| Timeline contradiction | Critical | Flag for human review |
| Uncited factual claim | High | Flag, suggest source |
| Voice inconsistency | Medium | Suggest rewrite |
| Minor spelling/grammar | Low | Auto-fix |
| Word choice improvement | Low | Suggest (optional) |
Before marking a section as "edited":
# Edit Report: Chapter 3, Section 2
**Status**: Needs revision
**Issues found**: 7 (2 critical, 3 high, 2 medium)
## Critical Issues
1. Character state violation: Anna appears but marked dead
2. Timeline contradiction: Event dated after subsequent event
## High Priority Issues
3. Uncited claim: "SOE training took 6 weeks"
4. Uncited claim: "Lyon network had 47 members"
5. Source reliability: Wikipedia cited for key historical fact
## Medium Priority Issues
6. Voice: Sentences avg 8 words (target: 15-20)
7. Continuity: Anna's eye color changed from brown to blue
## Recommended Actions
- Review timeline in sections 32-47
- Add citations for historical claims
- Revise for sentence variety
- Verify character descriptions against database
# Auto-Fix Summary: Chapter 3, Section 2
**Changes applied**: 5
1. Fixed spelling: "occured" → "occurred"
2. Removed character:anna from section (status=dead)
3. Updated location:safehouse.introduced = true
4. Added citation: source:soe_manual_1942
5. Standardized date format: "Aug 1942" → "1942-08-15"
**Verification**: All critical issues resolved
continuity.md — Detailed continuity checking strategiesstyle.md — Line-level editing techniques and guidelinesconsistency-check.surql — Database queries for automated checksThe editing skill should be invoked after writing completes:
