菜单
Run the review team over drafted chapters — proofreading, voice-drift audit and continuity audit. Use after drafting and before publication. Skippable by explicit user choice; the mechanical gates are not.
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt；你也可以切换为直接命令，或下载本地副本。
决定是否安装前，请先阅读 SKILL.md，以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt；运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/danielrosehill/Claude-Book-Writing-Plugin --skill book-review命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地？可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
正在显示 SKILL.md
| name | book-review |
| description | Run the review team over drafted chapters — proofreading, voice-drift audit and continuity audit. Use after drafting and before publication. Skippable by explicit user choice; the mechanical gates are not. |
Three reviewers, each with a narrow remit and a small working set. All three write findings; none of them edits prose.
| Agent | Remit | Reads |
|---|---|---|
proofreader | Mechanical correctness, per chapter | One chapter, style guide |
voice-auditor | Drift from the style guide | Samples across chapters |
continuity-auditor | Repetition, contradiction, unpaid promises | Lint output, ledger, summaries |
A reviewer that edits prose is a second author with no brief, and its changes are
invisible in a way an author's are not — they appear in no report, and nobody
knows the chapter now says something different. Findings go to
review/reports/; the chapter's writer applies them.
proofreader runs per chapter and parallelises freely — separate chapters,
separate reports, no shared state.
voice-auditor and continuity-auditor run once over the drafted set. Run them
after several chapters exist, not after all of them: voice drift found at chapter
four is a style guide correction, and found at chapter thirty it is thirty
rewrites.
By explicit user choice, not by default. Skipping is a decision about what the book is for — a personal reference printed for one shelf and a book sold to strangers do not warrant the same scrutiny. What matters is that the choice was made rather than defaulted into. Ask, and record the answer.
python3 scripts/book.py lint --strict
Runs before production regardless. An unresolved [VERIFY:] marker in a printed
reference work is not a style question, and print is not editable.
lint checks that a source is cited, never that it says what the chapter claims.
No reviewer here verifies facts. A chapter can pass every check while making a
confident, specific, invented claim about a system that does not behave that way.
Someone has to read the book against reality. Say so plainly rather than letting a clean set of reports imply otherwise.