persona-review

name	persona-review
description	Review a text through a chosen reviewer persona. Identifies issues from that persona's perspective and applies targeted surgical fixes. Preserves the owner persona as primary author unless explicitly told otherwise.

Persona Review

Purpose

Use this skill when you want a specific reviewer perspective applied to existing text — without handing ownership of the text to the reviewer.

This skill is for:

• getting a second-persona read on text already written or rewritten
• applying targeted improvements from a specific editorial stance
• reviewing text before publication through a sharper or differently-calibrated lens
• running a standalone review pass that /persona-write chain mode would run internally

Core rules

• The reviewer persona is not the author. The text has an owner — that is the voice the output should primarily reflect.
• Reviewers identify problems, then apply surgical fixes. They do not ask permission before making changes.
• Reviewers do not rewrite the whole piece in their own voice.
• Reviewers do not replace the owner persona.
• Fixes should be targeted: sentence-level, paragraph-level, or local framing. Not full rewrites.
• Preserve meaning before anything else.
• The reviewer's job is to make the text better, not to make it sound like them.

Scratch folder & Pipeline traceability

To ensure the pipeline is followed and the user can see the internal reasoning, every review task must use a scratch folder.

1. Create a task folder: scratch/YYYY-MM-DD-[task-slug]/
2. Record every step: Each step in the review workflow must be written to its own .md file in that folder.
3. Number the files: Use 01-owner-voice.md, 02-review-feedback.md, etc.
4. Final output: Write the final revised text to final.md in the same folder before returning it to the user.

This applies to all tasks. The scratch folder is gitignored.

When to use this skill

Use this skill when you want to:

• run a review pass through a specific lens without fully rewriting the text
• apply one reviewer persona without building a full chain
• get targeted editorial feedback from a defined perspective
• improve framing, clarity, compression, or audience fit without displacing the voice

When not to use this skill

Do not use this skill when you want:

• a full rewrite in the reviewer's voice — use /persona-write with that persona instead
• grammar correction only — the reviewer edits with purpose, not just for correctness
• detector evasion

Main user flow

If the user gave a reviewer persona

Proceed directly.

If the user did not give a reviewer persona

Ask which perspective to review from.

List the preset options:

• sharp-technical: direct, concise, technical — cuts excess, tightens reasoning
• pragmatic-builder: practical, useful — improves clarity of action and implementation
• clear-teacher: explanatory — opens up dense reasoning, improves accessibility
• skeptical-analyst: careful, evidence-aware — identifies assumptions, weak claims, overreach
• blunt-operator: maximum compression — cuts ceremony, softness, and length aggressively
• problem-first-marketer: audience-first — improves framing, problem articulation, entry points

Also accept plain-language descriptions.

If the user has an owner persona in mind

Accept it and keep it in context. The review should preserve that owner's voice.

If no owner persona is stated, infer from the text's existing voice or proceed without one — still apply surgical fixes, not full replacement.

Review workflow

For each review task, process through the scratch folder:

Step 1: Understand the text's owner voice (01-owner-voice.md)

Before reviewing, identify:

• what persona or voice the text is currently written in
• what the text is trying to do
• who it is for
• what must be preserved

Step 2: Apply the reviewer perspective (02-review-feedback.md)

From the reviewer persona's stance, identify:

• what feels off, unclear, or misframed
• where tone is wrong for the intended audience
• where the owner persona overdid or underdid something
• what is too dense, too soft, too vague, too cold, too polished, or too weak
• where the argument, framing, or emphasis can improve
• where the text drifts from the owner persona's positive shape (Identity, Rhythm, Stylometric Signature)

Reference docs/review-principles.md and ../persona-write/docs/voice-guide.md.

Step 3: Apply surgical fixes (03-revision-draft.md)

Make targeted changes directly. Do not ask permission first.

Apply: ...

Step 4: Report what changed (final.md)

After the review pass, produce the final version and a short note explaining:

• what the reviewer identified as the main problems
• what was changed and why
• what was deliberately left alone

Return this final version to the user.

Output format

Return:

• a short reviewer summary (what the main issues were)
• the revised text with changes applied

For substantial revisions, note which sections changed and what drove the changes.

Reviewer pairings

For useful combinations, see docs/reviewer-pairings.md.

Voice coherence

The reviewer notices drift from the owner persona's positive shape — Identity, Rhythm model, Stylometric Signature, Lexical Shunts, Taboo patterns. The check is fit to the owner's positive target, not enumeration of generic AI patterns.

Reference: docs/review-principles.md and ../persona-write/docs/voice-guide.md.