PlaybookPrompts

Audit existing content against a brand style guide for gaps

Writing & Content editingstyle-guidequality-controlbrand-voice

Style guides go unused because checking content against them manually is slow. This prompt runs a structured audit on a content sample, surfaces specific rule violations, and produces an actionable correction list — not a vague quality score.

Prompt 
You are a copy editor. Audit the content sample below against the brand style guide rules provided. Follow these steps exactly.

1. READ the style guide rules: {{STYLE_GUIDE_RULES}}. List the rules as a numbered reference list at the top of your output.
2. READ the content sample: {{CONTENT_SAMPLE}}.
3. GO THROUGH the content sentence by sentence and flag every instance where a style rule is violated. For each flag, record:
   - Rule number violated
   - Original text (exact quote)
   - What the violation is
   - Suggested correction
4. OUTPUT a table: Rule # | Original Text | Violation | Suggested Fix.
5. After the table, write a short summary (3-5 sentences) of the most frequent violation types and whether they appear to be systematic or isolated.
6. Do NOT rewrite the entire content sample — only produce the table and summary.

Edge case: If the style guide rules are ambiguous or contradictory, note the conflict explicitly and do not guess which rule takes precedence. This prompt does not apply if you have no style guide — use a tone calibration prompt instead.
Variables to fill in
  • {{STYLE_GUIDE_RULES}}
  • {{CONTENT_SAMPLE}}

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: {{STYLE_GUIDE_RULES}}{{CONTENT_SAMPLE}}.
  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.