The Review Bottleneck Ends Here

Automate the first 80% of editorial review. Custom scoring criteria, instant feedback, one-click improvement — so your senior editors spend time on strategy, not catching the same mistakes every week.

Build Your Editorial Reviewer — Free

Your Best Editors Are Stuck Doing First-Pass Reviews

Your editorial process looks something like this:

  1. Writer submits draft
  2. Editor reads the entire piece — checks structure, readability, tone, accuracy, CTAs
  3. Editor writes detailed feedback
  4. Writer revises
  5. Editor re-reads
  6. Maybe another round
  7. Published

The problem isn't steps 4–7. It's step 2. Your most experienced editors are spending hours on first-pass review — catching structural issues, readability problems, weak CTAs, and inconsistent tone.

Every hour your editor spends catching "use shorter paragraphs" is an hour they're not spending on content strategy, editorial direction, or training junior writers.

First-Pass Review in Seconds. Human Judgment Where It Matters.

TeamBench handles the editorial checklist — the structural, mechanical, and stylistic checks that every piece needs — so editors only review content that needs their expertise.

1. Define your editorial standards as scoring criteria

Structure (25%), readability (25%), tone & voice (25%), engagement (25%). Attach your style guide via knowledge base.

2. Writers self-review before submission

Writers see a score and specific feedback like "Your introduction is 4 paragraphs before reaching the main point — lead with the key takeaway."

3. Quality gates enforce the minimum bar

Set the gate at 80. Drafts below the threshold don't enter the editorial queue. Your editor's queue shrinks by 40–60%.

4. Track publishing velocity and quality

Score Trends shows average editorial scores over time. Are scores trending up? Your writers are learning.

5. Diff view for revision tracking

Your editor can scan the changes in 30 seconds instead of re-reading the entire piece.

What This Looks Like in Practice

Media company. 1 managing editor, 2 section editors, 6 staff writers, 4 contributors. Publishing 30 articles per month.

Before TeamBench

  • ✕Managing editor reads every piece → 20+ hours/month on first-pass review
  • ✕Section editors handle revisions → another 15 hours combined
  • ✕Average 2.4 revision rounds per article
  • ✕Publishing cadence slips every month — review queue backs up by Thursday
  • ✕New writers take 6–8 weeks to internalize editorial standards

After TeamBench

  • Editorial reviewer with style guide via knowledge base → quality gate at 80
  • Writers self-review → first submissions average 82 (up from ~65)
  • Revision rounds drop from 2.4 to 1.1 per article
  • Managing editor reviews scores + reads only flagged content → 7 hours/month
  • New writers reach editorial standard within 2 weeks

28 editorial hours/month reclaimed across the team. Publishing cadence stabilized. New writers ramp 3x faster.

Key Features

Custom scoring criteriaScore on YOUR editorial standards — structure, readability, tone, engagement.
Knowledge basesAttach your style guide. Every review reflects your publication's standards.
Quality gatesMinimum score before entering the editorial queue. Reduces editor workload by 40–60%.
One-click improveWriters fix structural and stylistic issues themselves. Fewer revision rounds.
Diff viewEditors scan what changed in 30 seconds instead of re-reading the whole piece.
Score trendsTrack editorial quality over time. Identify which writers need coaching.
Auto-improveSet a target score and let AI iterate — draft arrives polished.

Resources

Content Review Process That ScalesReduce Content Review TimeFree Readability CheckerContent Scoring Rubric Builder

Reclaim Your Editorial Time

Build an editorial reviewer in five minutes. Attach your style guide. Set a quality gate. Let writers meet the bar before they submit.

Build Your Editorial Reviewer — Free

No credit card required · Style guide integration · Diff view included