PlaybookPrompts

Audit existing copy for sensory language gaps

Creative & Design copywritingeditingbrand-voice

Copy that only describes features misses the reader's body. This prompt runs a sensory audit on existing copy and tells you exactly which senses are underused and how to fix them.

Prompt 
You are a copywriter specializing in experiential writing. Audit the following copy for {{BRAND_OR_PRODUCT_NAME}} and identify where sensory language is missing or weak.

Copy to audit:
{{COPY_TO_AUDIT}}

1. Read the copy and tag each sentence with which sense it activates: sight, sound, smell, taste, touch, or none.
2. Count how many sentences activate each sense. Present this as a simple tally.
3. Identify the 2-3 sentences most in need of sensory enrichment. Quote them exactly.
4. Rewrite each of those sentences with one specific sensory detail added. Do not change the meaning or add claims that aren't implied by the original.
5. Flag any sensory language that already exists but feels generic or overused (e.g., 'smooth,' 'fresh'). Suggest a concrete replacement for each.

Edge case: If the copy is for a B2B technical product, sensory language may not be appropriate in every section. Flag which sections should stay factual and note this in your audit.
Variables to fill in
  • {{BRAND_OR_PRODUCT_NAME}}
  • {{COPY_TO_AUDIT}}

How to use this prompt

  1. Copy the prompt above (Copy button on the top-right).
  2. Replace each {{VAR}} with your own value. Variables: {{BRAND_OR_PRODUCT_NAME}}{{COPY_TO_AUDIT}}.
  3. Paste it into one of the recommended tools below.
  4. Iterate: tighten constraints in the prompt if the output is generic.

Why this prompt is structured this way

The prompt is split into explicit steps because LLMs do better when the path is named, not implied. Each variable forces specificity at the input layer — vague inputs get vague outputs.

Heads up: some of the links on this page are affiliate links — meaning we may earn a commission if you sign up after clicking, at no extra cost to you. We only recommend tools we'd put on our own stack. You can see our full affiliate disclosure here.

Pair this prompt with a tool

Grammarly

$12/mo

Grammar, tone, and clarity across every app.

Grammarly remains the default for grammar + tone checking. The 'Grammarly Go' generative features are catching up but are not the main reason to subscribe.

writingproductivity

Notion AI

$8/user/mo add-on

AI baked into the docs/wiki/projects tool you already use.

Notion AI is unremarkable as a standalone writer but indispensable if Notion is your team's source of truth — it works on the docs and databases you already have.

productivitywriting

Claude (Anthropic)

$0/mo (Pro at $20)

Frontier model with long context and strong reasoning.

Claude (Opus / Sonnet / Haiku tiers) is the assistant favored by writers and engineers who care about reasoning quality and tone. 1M token context on Opus.

writingcodinglearning

ChatGPT (OpenAI)

$0/mo (Plus at $20)

The category-defining general-purpose AI assistant.

ChatGPT has the broadest feature surface: image gen, voice, custom GPTs, web browsing, code execution. Often the right default; sometimes beaten on specific tasks by Claude or Perplexity.

writingcodinglearning

The PlaybookPrompts weekly

One short email per week. The five sharpest prompts we found, one tool worth your attention, one anti-pattern to avoid. Unsubscribe in one click.

Newsletter signup is not configured. Set PUBLIC_NEWSLETTER_USERNAME in the build env.