How to use the Writing Feedback Tool.
Ask for feedback against the assignment or publication goal. Prioritize a few consequential edits instead of receiving a long list of unrelated preferences.
Make the workflow fit your task.
Supply the audience and evaluation criteria, then request the few changes that would most improve the argument. Tie each recommendation to a passage and explain the effect on the reader.
- What you provide
- Draft and evaluation criteria.
- What you get
- Actionable feedback organized by argument, structure and clarity.
See the input and the result.
Illustrative input and output · a teaching example, not a live WebAct run
Example input
Draft argues for shorter meetings but gives no examples; audience is team leads. Provide writing feedback from these supplied observations.
Completed example
Main gap: the argument lacks a concrete example showing which meeting could be shortened and what replaces it. Revision priority: add one real case, explain the alternative and acknowledge when live discussion is necessary. Why it matters: team leads need a usable decision rule, not only a general preference for shorter meetings. No example is invented on the writer's behalf.
Load this input into the prompt, then copy it to WebAct to try the task. Your result may differ from the illustration.
Decisions and troubleshooting.
Should feedback rewrite the whole draft?
Start with diagnosis and a limited revision example. You can decide which structural changes to make before replacing your own wording.
Why are the suggestions pulling in different directions?
Rank the goals, such as clarity before brevity, and rerun the review against that order. Conflicting preferences need an explicit priority.
Try it with your own source.
Replace the example with your material in the task prompt. Keep the requirements you need, then copy the task into WebAct.
Customize and copy the task ↑