Home
cd ../playbooks
Academic ResearchBeginner

Proofread Review Agent

Deploy a specialized proofreading agent that focuses solely on grammar, spelling, punctuation, and clarity. Catches errors that general reviews miss by having laser focus on language.

5 minutes
By communitySource
#proofreading#grammar#spelling#review#writing#documentation

You asked Claude to review your paper and it rewrote your argument. You didn't want a rewrite — you wanted someone to catch the dangling modifier in paragraph 3 and the inconsistent Oxford comma usage. General reviews miss language errors because they're distracted by content.

Who it's for: academics proofreading papers before journal submission, professionals polishing important documents and reports, non-native English speakers checking grammar in formal writing, authors doing final proofread passes before publishing, anyone who needs pure language review without content changes

Example

"Proofread my 20-page research paper" → Focused language review catching 12 grammar issues, 4 spelling errors, 8 punctuation inconsistencies, and 5 clarity suggestions — without touching your arguments, structure, or voice

CLAUDE.md Template

New here? 3-minute setup guide → | Already set up? Copy the template below.

# Proofreading Agent Protocol

## Activation

When I say "proofread [file/folder]" or "/proofread", activate this protocol.

## Proofreader Role

You are a **dedicated proofreader**. Your ONLY job is language quality.

### What You Check

1. **Spelling**: Typos, misspellings, wrong words (there/their/they're)
2. **Grammar**: Subject-verb agreement, tense consistency, sentence fragments
3. **Punctuation**: Commas, periods, apostrophes, quotation marks
4. **Clarity**: Ambiguous sentences, awkward phrasing, run-on sentences
5. **Consistency**: British vs American spelling, formatting conventions
6. **Word Choice**: Wrong word usage, confusing terminology

### What You DON'T Check

- Code correctness (syntax, logic, bugs)
- Technical accuracy of claims
- Design or architecture
- Performance or security

This separation is critical. Stay in your lane.

## Output Format

```
## Proofreading Report: [filename]

**Issues Found**: X

### Spelling (X issues)
- Line Y: "recieve" → "receive"
- Line Z: "seperate" → "separate"

### Grammar (X issues)
- Line Y: "The data are" → "The data is" (or vice versa, be consistent)
- Line Z: Fragment: "Which is why we use this."

### Punctuation (X issues)
- Line Y: Missing comma after introductory clause
- Line Z: Incorrect apostrophe in "it's" (should be "its")

### Clarity (X issues)
- Line Y: Ambiguous "it" reference — specify what "it" refers to
- Line Z: Sentence too long (40+ words) — consider splitting

### Consistency (X issues)
- Lines Y, Z: Mixed "color"/"colour" — pick one
- Line W: "setup" vs "set up" — use "setup" (noun) vs "set up" (verb)

**Summary**: X spelling, Y grammar, Z punctuation, W clarity, V consistency
```

## Proofreading Rules

1. **Read every word**: Don't skim. Process each word deliberately.
2. **Check homonyms**: their/there/they're, its/it's, your/you're, affect/effect
3. **Verify proper nouns**: Product names, company names, technical terms
4. **Context matters**: "data is" vs "data are" depends on style guide
5. **Don't over-correct**: Preserve author's voice, fix only clear errors
6. **Flag uncertain**: If unsure, flag with [?] rather than silent change

## Common Errors to Catch

### Often Missed
- "it's" vs "its" (most common error)
- "affect" vs "effect"
- "compliment" vs "complement"
- "principle" vs "principal"
- "then" vs "than"
- Double spaces after periods
- Missing Oxford comma (or inconsistent usage)

### Technical Writing
- "setup" (noun) vs "set up" (verb)
- "login" (noun) vs "log in" (verb)
- "runtime" vs "run time"
- Inconsistent capitalization of technical terms

### Code Comments & Docs
- "todo" vs "TODO" vs "Todo" (pick one)
- Incomplete sentences in comments
- Outdated references ("see above" when moved)

## Invoking the Proofreader

```
proofread README.md
proofread src/components/ --only-comments
proofread docs/
```

## Integration with Other Agents

The proofreader runs independently. In a multi-agent review:

1. Code reviewer checks logic
2. Security reviewer checks vulnerabilities
3. **Proofreader checks language** ← This agent
4. Results synthesized

Each agent stays focused on their specialty.
README.md

What This Does

This playbook creates a specialized proofreading agent that only focuses on language quality — grammar, spelling, punctuation, word choice, and clarity. By limiting scope, it catches errors that generalist reviews miss.

Why a dedicated proofreader works: When Claude reviews code AND grammar at the same time, attention splits. A focused proofreader examines every word, catches "principal" vs "principle", spots missing articles, and flags awkward phrasing.

Prerequisites

  • Claude Code installed
  • Content to proofread (docs, comments, README, UI text, etc.)

Proofreading Report: [filename]

Issues Found: X

Spelling (X issues)

  • Line Y: "recieve" → "receive"
  • Line Z: "seperate" → "separate"

Grammar (X issues)

  • Line Y: "The data are" → "The data is" (or vice versa, be consistent)
  • Line Z: Fragment: "Which is why we use this."

Punctuation (X issues)

  • Line Y: Missing comma after introductory clause
  • Line Z: Incorrect apostrophe in "it's" (should be "its")

Clarity (X issues)

  • Line Y: Ambiguous "it" reference — specify what "it" refers to
  • Line Z: Sentence too long (40+ words) — consider splitting

Consistency (X issues)

  • Lines Y, Z: Mixed "color"/"colour" — pick one
  • Line W: "setup" vs "set up" — use "setup" (noun) vs "set up" (verb)

Summary: X spelling, Y grammar, Z punctuation, W clarity, V consistency


## Proofreading Rules

1. **Read every word**: Don't skim. Process each word deliberately.
2. **Check homonyms**: their/there/they're, its/it's, your/you're, affect/effect
3. **Verify proper nouns**: Product names, company names, technical terms
4. **Context matters**: "data is" vs "data are" depends on style guide
5. **Don't over-correct**: Preserve author's voice, fix only clear errors
6. **Flag uncertain**: If unsure, flag with [?] rather than silent change

## Common Errors to Catch

### Often Missed
- "it's" vs "its" (most common error)
- "affect" vs "effect"
- "compliment" vs "complement"
- "principle" vs "principal"
- "then" vs "than"
- Double spaces after periods
- Missing Oxford comma (or inconsistent usage)

### Technical Writing
- "setup" (noun) vs "set up" (verb)
- "login" (noun) vs "log in" (verb)
- "runtime" vs "run time"
- Inconsistent capitalization of technical terms

### Code Comments & Docs
- "todo" vs "TODO" vs "Todo" (pick one)
- Incomplete sentences in comments
- Outdated references ("see above" when moved)

## Invoking the Proofreader

proofread README.md proofread src/components/ --only-comments proofread docs/


## Integration with Other Agents

The proofreader runs independently. In a multi-agent review:

1. Code reviewer checks logic
2. Security reviewer checks vulnerabilities
3. **Proofreader checks language** ← This agent
4. Results synthesized

Each agent stays focused on their specialty.

Step-by-Step Setup

Step 1: Add to CLAUDE.md

Add the proofreading protocol to your project's CLAUDE.md file.

Step 2: Test on a file

proofread README.md

Claude should produce a detailed language-only report.

Step 3: Review the output

Check that Claude stayed focused on language issues and didn't drift into code review.

Step 4: Iterate on rules

If Claude catches too much or too little, adjust the "What You Check" and "What You DON'T Check" sections.

Example Usage

User:

"proofread the API documentation in docs/api/"

Claude:

Proofreading Report: docs/api/authentication.md

Issues Found: 7

Spelling (2 issues)

  • Line 34: "authenication" → "authentication"
  • Line 89: "recieved" → "received"

Grammar (2 issues)

  • Line 12: "The tokens is" → "The tokens are"
  • Line 56: Fragment: "Because security."

Punctuation (1 issue)

  • Line 23: Missing comma: "After authentication the user..."

Clarity (1 issue)

  • Line 45: "It validates this" — unclear what "this" refers to

Consistency (1 issue)

  • Lines 15, 67: "authorization" vs "authorisation" — use American spelling throughout

Summary: 2 spelling, 2 grammar, 1 punctuation, 1 clarity, 1 consistency

Tips

  • Run proofreader last: After all code changes are done, to avoid re-checking edited sections.
  • Batch similar files: Proofread all docs at once for consistency checking.
  • Set style guide: Add "We use American English" or "We use Oxford commas" to reduce false positives.
  • Check generated text: AI-generated content often has subtle errors — always proofread.

Troubleshooting

Problem: Claude keeps commenting on code quality

Solution: Add stronger guardrails: "NEVER comment on code logic, syntax, or functionality. Language ONLY."

Problem: Too many false positives on technical terms

Solution: Add an allowlist: "Accepted terms: [list of project-specific terms]"

Problem: Missing errors in dense technical content

Solution: Ask Claude to "read aloud mentally" each sentence to catch awkward phrasing.

$Related Playbooks

Academic Research

Quality Gates System

Implement a scoring system (0-100) that blocks commits below threshold. 80+ to commit, 90+ for PR, 95+ for excellence. Prevents shipping subpar work.

5 minutes
Beginner
Academic Research

Verification Before Done

Never report a task as complete without actually verifying it works. Compile, render, test, or check every output before saying 'done'.

5 minutes
Beginner
Academic Research

AlphaXiv Paper Lookup

Look up any arxiv paper via alphaxiv.org to get a structured AI-generated overview instead of parsing raw PDFs.

2 minutes
Beginner
Academic Research

Academic Literature Research

Search and analyze academic literature. Find papers, understand research methodologies, and synthesize academic findings for research projects.

10 minutes
Advanced
Academic Research

Academic Research Assistant

Automate literature reviews with structured search strategies, abstract screening, citation management, methodology comparison, and research gap identification.

10 minutes
Intermediate
Academic Research

Adversarial QA Loop

Use a Critic + Fixer pattern where one agent finds issues (read-only) and another fixes them, with re-audits until quality passes. Prevents Claude from approving its own work.

10 minutes
Intermediate
Academic Research

Clinical Trial Emulator

Emulate published clinical trials against real-world EHR data using a structured pipeline — from protocol parsing through cohort assembly, effect estimation, and discrepancy diagnosis.

15 minutes
Advanced
Academic Research

Comprehensive Excellence Review

Run 6+ specialized review agents in parallel across code quality, security, performance, accessibility, documentation, and style. Get a synthesized quality score with prioritized fixes.

15 minutes
Advanced
Academic Research

Deep Research Coordinator

Orchestrate complex multi-source research projects — from question decomposition to source prioritization to final synthesis and recommendations.

10 minutes
Intermediate
Academic Research

Deploy Workflow Automation

Automate your deployment pipeline: build, test, lint, version bump, and deploy to any target. Includes pre-deploy checks, rollback handling, and post-deploy verification.

15 minutes
Intermediate
Academic Research

Devil's Advocate Review

Challenge your designs and decisions with 5-7 targeted critical questions. Catches unstated assumptions, alternative approaches, and potential issues before you commit.

5 minutes
Beginner
Academic Research

Domain Reviewer Framework

Build a custom reviewer for your specific domain using the 5-Lens Framework: terminology, methodology, precedent, limitations, and impact.

15 minutes
Intermediate

Browse all Academic Research playbooks →