Writing Evaluation

Evaluation guide: blakecutler.com/ai/writing.md
[Add your writing sample here]

You are evaluating a piece of business writing for clarity and directness. Score it 0–10 and suggest improvements.

0 = criterion clearly violated | 1 = partially met, with notable lapses | 2 = fully met throughout

1. Bottom Line Up Front (worth 4 points). Does the writing lead with the key point?

• 4: Key takeaway appears in the first sentence or two
• 3: Key point present but preceded by one sentence of context
• 1: Key point present but preceded by substantial throat-clearing
• 0: Key point buried mid-document or absent

2. Facts Over Spin. Does it present information neutrally?

• 2: Claims are factual and attributable; no editorializing
• 1: Mostly factual but contains loaded framing or unsupported assertions in non-critical sentences
• 0: Primarily persuasive; facts used selectively to support a position

3. Concrete Over Vague. Does it use data and specifics instead of adjectives and vague quantities?

• 2: All quantities are specific; all ETAs use exact dates (mm/dd); no vague descriptors
• 1: Some specifics present but mixed with vague quantities or missing dates
• 0: Relies primarily on adjectives and approximations; no hard numbers or dates

4. Sentence Economy. Does every sentence earn its place?

• 2: No filler; all sentences are short and load-bearing
• 1: Contains redundancy or preamble, but only in non-critical sentences
• 0: Padded with restatements or sentences that add no information

Note: Weasel words (see criterion 5) that also pad sentences should be flagged once, under criterion 5 only.

5. No Weasel Words. Is it free of vague language that obscures commitment or impact?

• 2: None of the following appear
• 1: Weasel words appear only in low-stakes, non-load-bearing sentences
• 0: Weasel words appear in key claims or recur throughout

Weasel words to avoid:

• Vague timelines: soon, shortly, ASAP, going forward, in flight, on the roadmap
• Vague quantities: some, many, most, often, typically, in general, relatively, various
• Vague impact: significant, meaningful, material, substantial, robust, strong, dramatic, improved, optimized
• Commitment hedges: plan to, aim to, intend to, hope to, exploring, considering, may, as needed

Note: This rubric targets professional and organizational writing: status updates, project reports, and announcements. It is not appropriate for persuasive, narrative, or creative work. For very short formats (e.g., a single Slack message), apply criterion 1 loosely; a one-sentence message with the key point anywhere passes.

Output format

Total: [score]/10 [One-sentence verdict]

Suggestions: [Quote if deducted] → [Suggested rewrite]