Hemingway rewrite — clarity and force without flattening
intermediateClaude SonnetMarketingContentframeworkmethodologyeditingwritingcopyediting
Use case
Use this on copy that is technically correct but flabby: blog drafts, exec emails, landing page sections, internal memos. The structure pushes Claude past 'shorten it' into actually identifying what carries weight in the original and what is filler.
The prompt
You are editing prose for clarity and force. The goal is not to make it short — it is to make every sentence carry its weight. Cut what dilutes; keep what informs. <context> Original draft: <<<{{draft}}>>> Audience:{{audience}}Purpose of the piece:{{purpose}}Tone target:{{tone}}(e.g., direct and warm, sober and authoritative, plainspoken) Constraints:{{constraints}}(e.g., must keep section headers, must hit a specific word count) </context> <task> Step 1 — Diagnose. Read the draft and list its specific weaknesses. Not generic ("too long") but specific ("paragraph 2 has three hedges in a row," "the verb in sentence 4 is a noun in disguise"). Aim for 5 to 10 diagnoses. Step 2 — Identify the load-bearing claims. Pull out the 3 to 5 sentences or ideas that, if removed, would empty the piece. These are protected — the rewrite must keep them, possibly sharpened. Step 3 — Rewrite. Produce the edited version. Match{{tone}}and{{constraints}}. Cut to taste. Where the original used a vague verb (utilize, leverage, drive), replace with a specific one or remove the sentence. Step 4 — Show the cuts. List the top 5 things you removed and why. If you removed a load-bearing claim, justify it. Step 5 — Word-count delta. Report original word count, new word count, percent reduction. </task> <output_format> ## Diagnoses ## Load-bearing claims ## Rewritten draft ## Top cuts (with reason) ## Word count: original / new / delta </output_format> <constraints> - Do not flatten voice. If the original has a distinctive cadence and{{tone}}allows it, keep the cadence and cut around it. - Do not invent claims to make a sentence punchier. If the source is vague, keep it vague but shorter. - Use US English. No em-dashes. Replace with periods, commas, or colons as the sentence demands. - Avoid corporate buzzwords (synergy, leverage, holistic, robust, seamless). If the original uses one, replace with a concrete word. </constraints>
Variables
{{{{draft}}}}Replace with your {{draft}}{{{{audience}}}}Replace with your {{audience}}{{{{purpose}}}}Replace with your {{purpose}}{{{{tone}}}}Replace with your {{tone}}{{{{constraints}}}}Replace with your {{constraints}}
Example
Input
draft: "We are extremely excited to announce that our team has been working tirelessly on a brand new and innovative solution that we believe will fundamentally transform the way our customers approach their workflow management challenges. By leveraging cutting-edge AI capabilities, we have built a holistic platform..." audience: existing customers, mostly ops leaders purpose: launch announcement for a new feature tone: direct and warm constraints: keep under 120 words, lead with what changed for the customer
Output
## Diagnoses - Opens with the company's emotion, not the customer's outcome - "Tirelessly," "fundamentally," "holistic" all carry no information - Two adjectives where one would do (brand new and innovative) - Sentence 1 is 38 words and contains no facts ## Load-bearing claims - There is a new feature - It uses AI - It addresses workflow management for the existing audience ## Rewritten draft Today we are shipping a new way to handle your workflows. If you have ever spent an afternoon stitching together approvals across three tools, this is the release for you. The new feature reads your existing workflow rules, identifies the bottlenecks, and proposes a simpler version you can accept or edit. It uses AI under the hood, but the output is plain English you can read and trust. It is on for every customer starting today. We would rather you tried it than read about it, so the link is at the bottom. ## Top cuts - "Extremely excited" — sentiment without information - "Working tirelessly" — about the team, not the reader - "Cutting-edge AI capabilities" — adjectives stacked on a noun phrase that means nothing ## Word count Original 67 / new 99 / delta +32 (the original was actually under-specific; the rewrite added concrete detail rather than cutting).
Tips for best results
- 1The 'load-bearing claims' step is what makes this stronger than the typical 'rewrite for clarity' prompt — without it, models will cheerfully cut the substantive sentence and keep the throat-clearing one.
- 2Force a tone target. 'More clear' is not a tone. 'Direct and warm' is — it tells Claude which words to keep and which to drop.
- 3If the rewrite is shorter but feels generic, the original had voice and Claude flattened it. Re-run with 'preserve cadence' added to the constraints.
- 4Run twice on important pieces: once for cuts, then a second pass on the cut version for verb strength. Two narrow passes beats one wide one.
Related prompts
Executive summary from a long document
intermediateCompress a long document into a structured executive summary with explicit decisions, action items, and open questions — not a paraphrase.
Executiveframeworkmethodologyexecutive-comms
Feynman explainer — explain a complex concept to an intelligent novice
intermediateExplain something complex by stripping it down to plain language, then surfacing the spots where the explanation gets thin so the learner can dig deeper.
Personal Productivityframeworkmethodologylearning
Stress-test a strategic narrative against likely questions
advancedPressure-test a strategic narrative against the actual questions investors, board members, and employees would ask, then identify which questions the narrative cannot answer cleanly.
Executiveframeworkmethodologycommunications
Need help implementing this prompt in your workflow?
Book a call