Editorial Review
Systematic editorial review for Chinese content before publication. Modeled after the publishing industry's "Three Reviews, Three Proofs" (三审三校) quality system, adapted for AI-assisted single-pass comprehensive review.
This skill catches errors that embarrass authors and organizations: typos, grammar mistakes, factual inaccuracies, political landmines, and advertising law violations. It produces a structured review report with every issue located, categorized, and accompanied by a concrete fix.
When to Activate
- - Proofreading: "help me proofread", "check for typos", "审校一下", "校对"
- Editorial review: "review before publishing", "发布前审核", "editorial check"
- Compliance review: "check for sensitive content", "合规检查", "advertising law check"
- Grammar check: "check grammar", "检查语法", "有没有病句"
- Fact verification: "verify the facts", "核实数据", "fact-check this"
- General quality: user submits Chinese text and asks to "look it over", "check this", "review"
Review Modes
Select mode based on content length, stakes, and user request. Announce the selected mode before starting.
| Mode | Content Length | Layers | Output | Use When |
|---|
| Quick | < 500 chars | Layers 1-3 | Inline comments | Social media, short posts, internal messages |
| Standard |
500-5,000 chars | Layers 1-6 | Structured report | Blog posts, articles, newsletters |
|
Deep | > 5,000 chars or high-stakes | All 8 layers | Full report + summary | Press releases, official statements, regulatory filings, news articles |
Default to Standard. Escalate to Deep if the content is public-facing and high-stakes (government, legal, financial, medical). Use Quick only when explicitly requested or for obviously short, low-stakes content.
Platform Compatibility
Map interactive tools to whatever the current environment provides:
| Platform | Question tool | File write |
|---|
| Claude Code | INLINECODE0 | INLINECODE1 / INLINECODE2 |
| Codex |
request_user_input |
write_file /
edit_file |
| Gemini |
ask_user | file tools |
| Other / Claude.ai | Numbered options in chat | inline output |
Language: The review report is written in the same language as the content (Chinese). Skill internals and reference files are in English.
The 8-Layer Review Pipeline
Process layers sequentially. Each layer catches a distinct class of errors. Do NOT skip layers — earlier layers catch surface errors that could mask deeper issues.
For each issue found, record: location (paragraph/sentence number or quote), category (layer + sub-type), original text, suggested fix, and severity (Critical / Major / Minor).
Layer 1: Character Accuracy (文字准确性)
The most fundamental layer. Chinese input methods produce homophone and shape-similar errors that spell-checkers miss.
Check for:
- - Homophone confusion (同音字): 的/地/得, 在/再, 以/已, 做/作, 即/既, etc.
- Similar-looking character errors (形近字): 已/己/巳, 未/末, 拔/拨, 辩/辨/辫
- Common fixed-phrase errors: 松驰→松弛, 穿流不息→川流不息, 渡假→度假, 再接再励→再接再厉
- Missing or duplicated characters (e.g., 党的的领导)
- Inconsistent simplified/traditional character mixing
Consult references/typography-and-punctuation.md § "Common Character Errors" for the full error list.
Severity: Typos in titles/headlines = Critical. Body text typos = Major. Rare/debatable cases = Minor.
Layer 2: Punctuation and Typography (标点与排版)
Chinese has its own punctuation system (GB/T 15834-2011) with strict rules that differ from English.
Check for:
- - Full-width vs half-width punctuation (Chinese text must use full-width: ,。!?;:)
- Spaces between Chinese and Latin characters/numbers (花了 5000 元, not 花了5000元)
- NO space between numbers and %, °C, etc. (90%, not 90 %)
- Proper ellipsis (……, six dots, not ... three dots)
- Proper em-dash (——, two character widths)
- No stacked punctuation (!!! is wrong)
- Book title marks 《》 used only for published works, not events/brands/courses
- Nested quotation marks (outer " ", inner ' ')
- Proper noun capitalization in mixed text (GitHub not github, iOS not IOS)
Consult references/typography-and-punctuation.md § "Punctuation Rules" and § "CJK-Latin Mixing" for full rules.
Severity: Systematic punctuation errors = Major. Isolated cases = Minor.
Layer 3: Grammar and Logic (语法与逻辑)
Chinese grammar errors (病句) fall into six standard categories. Logical fallacies undermine credibility.
Check for the six error types:
- 1. Improper word order (语序不当): misplaced modifiers, adverbials after predicates
- Mismatched collocation (搭配不当): subject-predicate, verb-object, modifier mismatches
- Missing/redundant components (成分残缺或赘余): missing subject after 使/让/通过, redundant modifiers
- Tangled structure (结构混乱): mid-sentence subject shifts, blended constructions
- Ambiguous meaning (表意不明): unclear pronoun references, scope ambiguity
- Illogical statements (不合逻辑): self-contradictions, one-sided/two-sided mismatches, improper classification in parallel lists
Also check for:
- - Run-on sentences (> 80 characters without punctuation)
- Logical fallacies: hasty generalization, false cause, circular reasoning, equivocation
- Unsupported causal claims
Consult references/grammar-and-logic.md for detailed examples and detection patterns.
Severity: Ambiguity or contradiction = Critical. Grammar errors = Major. Style-level issues = Minor.
Layer 4: Factual Accuracy (事实准确性)
Incorrect facts damage credibility and may create legal liability.
Check for:
- - Person names, titles, and affiliations — are they current and correct?
- Organization names — official full name on first use?
- Dates and times — do they match known events?
- Statistics and data — traced to a primary source? Correctly quoted?
- Direct quotes — verified against original source? No selective editing?
- Geographic references — correct place names and relationships?
- Historical claims — consistent with established record?
- Scientific/technical claims — supported by evidence?
When web access is available, verify key claims using search tools. When unavailable, flag unverifiable claims rather than silently passing them.
Consult references/fact-checking.md for the verification methodology.
Severity: Factual errors in key claims = Critical. Unverified statistics = Major. Minor date/name details = Minor.
Layer 5: Political and Territorial Compliance (政治与领土合规)
Content published in or about China must observe strict political sensitivities. Violations can result in content removal, fines, or worse.
Key areas:
- - Taiwan: Must be "Taiwan Province" or "China's Taiwan region", never a separate country. No "Republic of China" or Taiwan flag references.
- Hong Kong / Macau: Must use "SAR" designation, not standalone country references.
- Tibet / Xinjiang: No framing suggesting independence or separatism.
- Maps: Must include nine-dash line, Taiwan, Diaoyu Islands, Nansha Islands if applicable.
- Historical events: Handle Cultural Revolution, specific political campaigns with care.
- Leadership references: Correct titles, no satirical nicknames, no unauthorized commercial use.
- Ethnic and religious content: No content promoting division or extremism.
Consult references/political-compliance.md for the full framework and examples.
Severity: Territorial sovereignty violations = Critical. Sensitive framing = Major. Borderline references = Minor (flag for human review).
Layer 6: Advertising Law Compliance (广告法合规)
Chinese advertising law (广告法) prohibits absolute claims and deceptive language with fines of 200K-1M yuan.
Prohibited categories:
- - Superlatives: 最好, 最优, 最先进, 史上最低价
- Ranking claims: 第一, NO.1, 全网第一, 独一无二
- Grade/level terms: 国家级, 世界级, 顶级, 极品
- Exclusivity: 独创, 缔造者, 发明者
- Scarcity manipulation: 绝版, 空前绝后
- Authority endorsement: 特供, 专供, 国家领导人推荐
- Urgency manipulation: 再不抢就没了, 错过不再
- Unsubstantiated medical/health/financial claims
Exceptions exist — terms used in corporate philosophy, internal product comparisons, product specifications, or backed by documented certifications are permitted.
Consult references/advertising-law.md for the complete prohibited word list and exception rules.
Severity: Clear prohibited terms in commercial content = Critical. Borderline terms = Major. Non-commercial content = Minor (advisory).
Layer 7: Consistency and Style (一致性与风格)
Inconsistency signals carelessness and confuses readers.
Check for:
- - Same concept using different terms across the text
- Mixed date formats (2026年3月 vs 2026-03 vs 3月2026)
- Mixed number formats (Arabic vs Chinese numerals for same context)
- Person/organization name variations
- Tone shifts (formal ↔ colloquial) without purpose
- Mixed use of 你 vs 您 (formality level)
Severity: Terminology inconsistency = Major. Minor format variations = Minor.
Layer 8: Structure and Readability (结构与可读性)
The final layer evaluates whether the content works as a whole.
Check for:
- - Title accurately reflects content
- Lead/abstract summarizes key points (for news/articles)
- Logical paragraph progression
- No duplicate content across sections
- Image captions present and accurate (if applicable)
- Hyperlinks functional and relevant (if applicable)
- Appropriate length for the format
- Clear conclusion or call-to-action
Severity: Misleading title = Critical. Structural gaps = Major. Readability nits = Minor.
Output Format
Review Report Structure
Always produce the report in this structure:
CODEBLOCK0
Severity Definitions
| Severity | Meaning | Action |
|---|
| Critical | Factual error, political violation, legal risk, or meaning-altering mistake | Must fix before publication |
| Major |
Clear error that harms quality or credibility | Should fix before publication |
|
Minor | Style preference, debatable choice, or minor inconsistency | Fix if time permits |
Workflow
- 1. Receive content — Read the full text before making any comments. Understand the content type, target audience, and publication context.
- Select mode — Announce: "This is a [length] [content type]. I'll run a [mode] review covering Layers [N-M]."
- Execute layers sequentially — Work through each layer. Record every issue found.
- Compile report — Organize issues by layer. Count severities. Assess overall readiness.
- Present report — Share the structured report. If the user wants a corrected version, produce it.
- Iterate — If the user revises and resubmits, run a focused re-review on previously flagged issues.
Examples
Example 1: Quick review
User: "帮我看看这条朋友圈:新年到了,祝大家在新的一年里万事如意!我们公司是全国最好的AI公司,欢迎合作."
Review: Two issues found.
- - Layer 2 (Punctuation): Half-width commas and period used. Should be full-width ,and 。 → Major
- Layer 6 (Advertising Law): "全国最好的" is a superlative claim prohibited by advertising law → Critical
Example 2: Standard review trigger
User: "审校一下这篇公众号文章" [pastes 2000-char article]
→ Standard mode, Layers 1-6, full structured report.
Example 3: Deep review trigger
User: "这是要发到官网的新闻稿,帮我仔细检查一下,特别是合规方面" [pastes 8000-char press release]
→ Deep mode, all 8 layers, extra attention to Layers 5-6.
Caveats
- - Political compliance is advisory, not authoritative. This skill flags potential issues based on known patterns, but political sensitivities evolve. Always have a qualified human reviewer make final decisions on politically sensitive content.
- Fact-checking depends on available tools. With web access, the skill can verify claims. Without it, the skill flags unverifiable claims but cannot confirm accuracy.
- Advertising law applies to commercial content. Non-commercial editorial content (news reporting, academic papers) has different rules. The skill adjusts its severity accordingly.
- This skill does NOT rewrite content. It identifies issues and suggests fixes. The author retains creative control. A clean corrected version is only produced when explicitly requested.
- Dialect and regional variations exist. The default standard is mainland simplified Chinese (普通话). For Taiwan (Traditional Chinese) or Hong Kong contexts, some rules (especially Layer 5) may need adjustment — inform the skill of the target region.
编辑审校
针对中文内容在发布前进行系统性编辑审校。该技能借鉴出版行业的三审三校质量体系,并针对AI辅助的单次全面审校进行了优化。
此技能可捕捉那些令作者和组织难堪的错误:错别字、语法错误、事实不准确、政治敏感问题以及广告法违规行为。它会生成一份结构化的审校报告,其中每个问题都有定位、分类,并附带具体的修正方案。
何时激活
- - 校对:帮我审校一下、检查错别字、审校一下、校对
- 编辑审校:发布前审核、发布前审核、编辑检查
- 合规检查:检查敏感内容、合规检查、广告法检查
- 语法检查:检查语法、检查语法、有没有病句
- 事实核查:核实事实、核实数据、核实事实
- 常规质量检查:用户提交中文文本并要求看一下、检查一下、审校
审校模式
根据内容长度、重要程度和用户要求选择模式。在开始前宣布所选模式。
| 模式 | 内容长度 | 层级 | 输出 | 使用场景 |
|---|
| 快速 | < 500字 | 第1-3层 | 内联评论 | 社交媒体、短帖、内部消息 |
| 标准 |
500-5,000字 | 第1-6层 | 结构化报告 | 博客文章、文章、通讯稿 |
|
深度 | > 5,000字或高重要性 | 全部8层 | 完整报告+摘要 | 新闻稿、官方声明、监管文件、新闻报道 |
默认为标准模式。如果内容面向公众且重要性高(政府、法律、金融、医疗),则升级为深度模式。仅在明确要求或内容明显较短且重要性低时使用快速模式。
平台兼容性
根据当前环境提供的工具进行映射:
| 平台 | 提问工具 | 文件写入 |
|---|
| Claude Code | AskUserQuestion | Write / Edit |
| Codex |
request
userinput | write
file / editfile |
| Gemini | ask_user | 文件工具 |
| 其他 / Claude.ai | 聊天中的编号选项 | 内联输出 |
语言:审校报告使用与内容相同的语言(中文)撰写。技能内部文件和参考文件为英文。
八层审校流程
按顺序处理各层。每一层捕捉不同类别的错误。不要跳过任何层——前面的层会捕捉可能掩盖深层问题的表面错误。
对于发现的每个问题,记录:位置(段落/句子编号或引用)、类别(层级+子类型)、原文、建议修正和严重程度(严重/主要/次要)。
第1层:文字准确性
最基础的层级。中文输入法会产生拼写检查器无法发现的同音字和形近字错误。
检查内容:
- - 同音字混淆:的/地/得、在/再、以/已、做/作、即/既等
- 形近字错误:已/己/巳、未/末、拔/拨、辩/辨/辫
- 常见固定短语错误:松驰→松弛、穿流不息→川流不息、渡假→度假、再接再励→再接再厉
- 缺失或重复字符(例如:党的的领导)
- 简体/繁体字混用不一致
参考references/typography-and-punctuation.md § 常见字符错误获取完整错误列表。
严重程度:标题/头条中的错别字=严重。正文中的错别字=主要。罕见/有争议的情况=次要。
第2层:标点与排版
中文有自己的标点符号系统(GB/T 15834-2011),有严格且不同于英文的规则。
检查内容:
- - 全角与半角标点(中文文本必须使用全角:,。!?;:)
- 中文与拉丁字符/数字之间的空格(花了 5000 元,而非花了5000元)
- 数字与%、°C等之间无空格(90%,而非90 %)
- 正确的省略号(……,六个点,而非...三个点)
- 正确的破折号(——,两个字符宽度)
- 无叠用标点(!!!是错误的)
- 书名号《》仅用于已出版作品,而非活动/品牌/课程
- 嵌套引号(外层 ,内层 )
- 混合文本中专有名词的大小写(GitHub而非github,iOS而非IOS)
参考references/typography-and-punctuation.md § 标点规则和§ 中英文混排获取完整规则。
严重程度:系统性标点错误=主要。个别情况=次要。
第3层:语法与逻辑
中文语法错误分为六种标准类别。逻辑谬误会损害可信度。
检查六种错误类型:
- 1. 语序不当:修饰语位置错误、状语后置于谓语
- 搭配不当:主谓、动宾、修饰语搭配不当
- 成分残缺或赘余:使/让/通过后缺少主语、修饰语冗余
- 结构混乱:句中主语转换、句式杂糅
- 表意不明:代词指代不清、范围歧义
- 不合逻辑:自相矛盾、一面与两面不匹配、并列项分类不当
还需检查:
- - 长句(超过80个字符无标点)
- 逻辑谬误:轻率概括、虚假因果、循环论证、偷换概念
- 无依据的因果断言
参考references/grammar-and-logic.md获取详细示例和检测模式。
严重程度:歧义或矛盾=严重。语法错误=主要。风格层面问题=次要。
第4层:事实准确性
错误的事实会损害可信度,并可能产生法律责任。
检查内容:
- - 人名、头衔和隶属关系——是否最新且正确?
- 组织名称——首次使用时是否使用官方全称?
- 日期和时间——是否与已知事件相符?
- 统计数据和数字——是否追溯到原始来源?引用是否正确?
- 直接引语——是否与原始来源核实?无选择性编辑?
- 地理参考——地名和关系是否正确?
- 历史论断——是否与既定记录一致?
- 科学/技术论断——是否有证据支持?
当可访问网络时,使用搜索工具核实关键论断。当无法访问时,标记无法核实的论断,而非默默通过。
参考references/fact-checking.md获取核实方法。
严重程度:关键论断中的事实错误=严重。未核实的统计数据=主要。次要日期/名称细节=次要。
第5层:政治与领土合规
在中国或关于中国发布的内容必须严格遵守政治敏感性。违规可能导致内容删除、罚款或更严重后果。
关键领域:
- - 台湾:必须为台湾省或中国台湾地区,绝不能作为独立国家。不得提及中华民国或台湾旗帜。
- 香港/澳门:必须使用特别行政区称谓,不得作为独立国家提及。
- 西藏/新疆:不得暗示独立或分裂主义。
- 地图:如适用,必须包括九段线、台湾、钓鱼岛、南沙群岛。
- 历史事件:谨慎处理文化大革命、特定政治运动。
- 领导人引用:正确头衔,无讽刺绰号,无未经授权的商业使用。
- 民族和宗教内容:不得包含促进分裂或极端主义的内容。
参考references/political-compliance.md获取完整框架和示例。
严重程度:领土主权违规=严重。敏感表述=主要。边缘性引用=次要(标记供人工审核)。
第6层:广告法合规
中国广告法禁止绝对化用语和欺骗性语言,罚款20万至100万元。
禁止类别:
- - 最高级:最好、最优、最先进、史上最低价
- 排名宣称:第一、NO.1、全网第一、独一无二
- 等级/级别术语:国家级、世界级、顶级、极品
- 排他性:独创、缔造者、发明者
- 稀缺性操纵:绝版、空前绝后
- 权威背书:特供、专供、国家领导人推荐
- 紧迫性操纵:再不抢就没了、错过不再
- 未经证实的医疗/健康/金融宣称
存在例外——用于企业理念、内部产品比较、产品规格或有文件证明的认证的术语是允许的。
参考references/advertising-law.md获取完整禁用词列表和例外规则。
严重程度:商业内容中明确的禁用术语=严重。边缘性术语=主要。非商业内容=次要(建议性)。
第7层:一致性与风格
不一致性表明粗心大意,并使读者困惑。
检查内容: