Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback
0
0

Revises book chapters based on feedback. Use when user says 'revise chapter X', 'improve chapter [number]', 'rewrite the opening of chapter X', 'make chapter X more [adjective]', or provides feedback on a chapter.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name Revising chapters
description Revises book chapters based on feedback. Use when user says 'revise chapter X', 'improve chapter [number]', 'rewrite the opening of chapter X', 'make chapter X more [adjective]', or provides feedback on a chapter.

Revising Chapters

Makes targeted improvements to chapters based on user feedback.

When to use this skill

  • User says "revise chapter X"
  • User provides feedback: "Chapter 3 needs more examples"
  • User requests changes: "Make chapter 2 more conversational"
  • User wants rewrites: "Rewrite the opening of chapter 5"
  • User mentions length: "Expand chapter 4"

What this skill does

  1. Loads the current chapter
  2. Reads outline for context (theme, purpose)
  3. Reads voice-profile for consistency
  4. Applies requested changes
  5. Git commits with descriptive message

Prerequisites

Must exist:

  • The chapter file being revised
  • outline.md (for theme/context)

If chapter doesn't exist:

I don't see /chapters/[number]-[title].md. 
Available chapters: [list existing chapter files]

Which chapter did you mean?

Revision types

Full rewrite

Trigger: "Revise chapter 3 based on this feedback: [notes]"

Process:

  1. Read current chapter
  2. Read all feedback/notes
  3. Understand what needs to change
  4. Rewrite chapter incorporating feedback
  5. Maintain theme alignment and voice

Targeted fix

Trigger: "Strengthen the opening of chapter 5"

Process:

  1. Read current chapter
  2. Focus only on specified section
  3. Improve that section
  4. Keep rest of chapter unchanged

Tone adjustment

Trigger: "Make chapter 2 more conversational"

Process:

  1. Read current chapter + voice-profile
  2. Adjust formality/style throughout
  3. Keep content/structure same
  4. Make it match requested tone

Content addition

Trigger: "Add more examples to chapter 4"

Process:

  1. Read current chapter
  2. Identify places needing examples
  3. Add 2-3 concrete examples
  4. Maintain flow and transitions

Length adjustment

Trigger: "Expand chapter 6" or "Condense chapter 2"

Process:

  1. Read current chapter
  2. Expand: Add detail, examples, explanation
  3. Condense: Remove redundancy, tighten prose
  4. Maintain key points and theme alignment

Process

Step 1: Understand the request

Clarify if needed:

  • Vague: "Revise chapter 3" → Ask: "What would you like me to change?"
  • Clear: "Add statistics to support the claims in chapter 3" → Proceed

Step 2: Load context

Read:

  1. Current chapter file
  2. outline.md (theme, chapter purpose)
  3. voice-profile.md if exists
  4. Adjacent chapters if needed for continuity

Step 3: Apply changes

Make the requested changes while maintaining:

  • Theme alignment
  • Voice consistency
  • Key points from outline
  • Natural flow

If change would hurt theme alignment, flag it:

Note: Making chapter 4 entirely about [X] would weaken its connection to 
the theme of [Y]. Consider: [alternative approach]

Step 4: Handle new research gaps

If revision introduces new gaps, mark them:

[RESEARCH: Need case study showing X | severity: MEDIUM]

Step 5: Git commit

Commit message should describe what changed:

git add chapters/[number]-[title].md
git commit -m "Revision: Chapter [number] - [brief description]"

Good commit messages:

  • "Revision: Chapter 3 - Added examples and data"
  • "Revision: Chapter 5 - Rewrote opening for stronger hook"
  • "Revision: Chapter 2 - Made tone more conversational"

Bad commit messages:

  • "Revision: Chapter 3" (not specific)
  • "Updates" (too vague)
  • "Fixed stuff" (unhelpful)

Examples

Example 1: Feedback-based revision

User: "Revise chapter 2. The feedback from my editor is: needs more concrete examples, and the transition to section 3 is abrupt."

Process:

  1. Read chapter 2
  2. Identify where examples would help
  3. Add 2-3 concrete examples
  4. Smooth transition to section 3
  5. Git commit: "Revision: Chapter 2 - Added examples and improved transition"

Example 2: Tone adjustment

User: "Make chapter 4 more data-driven. Right now it's too anecdotal."

Process:

  1. Read chapter 4
  2. Identify anecdotal sections
  3. Replace some stories with statistics/studies
  4. Keep some anecdotes for balance
  5. Git commit: "Revision: Chapter 4 - Shifted to more data-driven approach"

Example 3: Length expansion

User: "Chapter 1 is only 800 words. Expand it to hit closer to 1,500."

Process:

  1. Read chapter 1 + outline to see key points
  2. Add depth: more explanation, examples, or setup
  3. Don't pad - add substance
  4. Check: does it feel natural or forced?
  5. Git commit: "Revision: Chapter 1 - Expanded with additional depth"

Example 4: Structural change

User: "Move the framework explanation from chapter 3 to chapter 2, and adjust both chapters accordingly."

Process: This affects multiple chapters:

  1. Extract framework section from chapter 3
  2. Integrate into chapter 2 (find best placement)
  3. Adjust chapter 3 to flow without that section
  4. Update transitions in both
  5. Git commit BOTH chapters:
git add chapters/02-*.md chapters/03-*.md
git commit -m "Revision: Chapters 2-3 - Moved framework explanation to chapter 2"

Edge cases

Requested change conflicts with theme:

Making this change would weaken chapter [X]'s alignment with the theme.

Current theme: [statement]
Requested change: [description]
Conflict: [explanation]

Options:
1. Modify the change to maintain alignment: [suggestion]
2. Adjust the theme (requires reviewing all chapters)
3. Keep chapter as-is

What would you prefer?

Revision requires information not available:

To make this revision well, I'd need:
- [Specific info needed]
- [Other info needed]

Should I:
1. Make the revision with placeholder [RESEARCH: ...] markers
2. Wait until you provide this information

Unclear which chapter:

Which chapter should I revise?
Current chapters: [list from /chapters/ directory]

Multiple conflicting feedback points:

I see two pieces of feedback that conflict:
1. [Feedback A]
2. [Feedback B]

Which should take priority, or how should I balance them?

Quality standards

Revised chapters should:

  • ✓ Address the specific feedback/request
  • ✓ Maintain theme alignment
  • ✓ Match voice profile
  • ✓ Keep key points from outline
  • ✓ Have natural flow and transitions
  • ✓ Not introduce new problems

Collaboration with other skills

After revising:

  • Use check-theme-alignment if revision was substantial
  • Use track-research-gaps if new gaps were added
  • Consider revising adjacent chapters if flow was affected

Before revising:

  • User might have used check-theme-alignment to identify issues
  • Revision addresses alignment problems flagged

Files modified

  • /chapters/[number]-[title].md - The revised chapter
  • Sometimes multiple chapter files if structural changes

Best practices

Do:

  • Ask for clarification if request is vague
  • Flag when changes would hurt alignment
  • Make substantive improvements, not just word count padding
  • Maintain consistency with voice profile
  • Test whether revised section flows naturally

Don't:

  • Make changes you're not asked to make
  • Sacrifice theme alignment for other goals
  • Add fluff to hit word counts
  • Change voice significantly unless requested
  • Revise more chapters than requested without asking