Single-Principle Micro-Grader
Isolate one important criterion and use AI to improve it deeply
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 98%
The micro-grader is created by extracting one especially useful criterion from a broader evaluation framework and rebuilding the prompt around that criterion alone. The user supplies a piece of work, and the AI scores it on a smaller scale appropriate to the single principle, identifies every relevant violation, explains the problem, and produces a focused rewrite. Because the prompt is no longer balancing fifteen concerns, it can concentrate on details that a universal grader might treat superficially. The workflow should display the original and revised material side by side so the user can verify what changed, whether the core meaning survived, and whether the edit went too far. The same pattern can create specialized graders for wordiness, hooks, proof, emotional appeal, differentiation, or any other independently useful standard.
Origin
After running a fifteen-principle Ogilvy grader, the host singled out the wordy-and-repetitive criterion and built a smaller prompt dedicated to that one problem. Extracted from Marketing Against The Grain.
Core principles
- 01Focused evaluation can outperform an overly broad audit
- 02The most valuable principle deserves its own specialized workflow
- 03A narrow score should match the reduced scope
- 04Before-and-after output makes improvement easier to inspect
- 05Iterate the micro-grader when its output hides useful comparisons
How to run it
- 1
Select One Principle
Choose the criterion with the greatest immediate value for the work, such as eliminating wordiness or strengthening the opening hook.
Pro tip Use the broader grader's score breakdown to identify a promising candidate.
Watch out Do not isolate a principle that only makes sense in combination with several others.
- 2
Narrow the Prompt
Remove unrelated criteria and tell the AI that its only task is to elevate the work according to the selected principle.
Pro tip Retain a precise definition of the principle and examples of violations.
Watch out Residual instructions from the broader grader can pull the output back toward unrelated concerns.
- 3
Rescale the Evaluation
Use a compact scoring scale and require a rationale tied solely to the selected criterion.
Pro tip A ten-point scale is often sufficient for one principle.
Watch out Do not compare a single-principle score directly with a broader hundred-point score.
- 4
Diagnose Specific Issues
Require the AI to quote or identify the exact phrases, structures, or choices that violate the principle.
Pro tip Ask it to explain the cost of each issue, such as confusion, repetition, or lost impact.
Watch out A generic judgment does not tell the user what to change.
- 5
Generate a Focused Rewrite
Revise the material to improve the chosen criterion while preserving the original objective and essential claims.
Pro tip State any facts, terminology, or promises that must remain intact.
Watch out Aggressive optimization can remove necessary nuance or evidence.
- 6
Compare Before and After
Display the original and revised versions together and inspect the differences before accepting the result.
Pro tip Add this comparison explicitly to the prompt if the initial version only returns rewritten copy.
Watch out A shorter rewrite is not automatically a better or more accurate rewrite.
In the wild
The host extracts the wordy-and-repetitive principle from a fifteen-part Ogilvy grader. The new prompt scores the CRM copy out of ten, identifies long and repetitive constructions, and rewrites them into a shorter explanation of how the CRM unifies customer touchpoints, syncs data, and helps teams act faster. The host then adds a request to show the old and new copy together.
→ A broad copy audit becomes a focused editing tool with an inspectable before-and-after result.
Common mistakes
Keeping the old scoring scale
A one-principle grader should not imply the same coverage as a fifteen-principle, hundred-point audit.
Optimizing brevity at any cost
A dramatic reduction in words can also remove qualifications, proof, or essential product meaning.
Hiding the original
Returning only the revision makes it harder to verify what changed and judge whether the rewrite is genuinely better.
Is it for you?
Best for
Marketers who already know which copy or creative principle needs concentrated attention.
Not ideal for
Assets that need a broad strategic diagnosis or have several interacting weaknesses that cannot be assessed independently.
From the transcript
“This is let's create a version of this prompt, but only for the principal wordy and repetitive.”
“So this is the one that we created just for wording and repetitive.”
“I wonder if I do show me the before and after copy so I can compare.”
From the episode
I Built a Personal Marketing Coach With One Prompt