refactor(fiction-assistance)!: drop line-editor agent, add proofread and check-consistency commands

Two shifts in scope:

- Remove the line-editor agent. The plugin no longer mutates the
  manuscript — all commands report findings to the conversation
  and leave revisions to the writer.

- Consolidate the consistency surface. /check-voice and
  /check-continuity were narrow checks with overlapping concerns;
  they are replaced by /check-consistency, a single broader pass
  covering author voice, character voice, words-vs-actions
  alignment, and in-world believability. Plot-logic and
  sequencing concerns formerly in /check-continuity are now
  served by /generate-timeline's consistency-issues section.

- Add /proofread for the mechanical layer that previously had no
  command equivalent — grammar, tense, punctuation, spelling,
  agreement, sentence-level clarity. Reports issues; does not edit.

Command count unchanged at nine. The plugin is now agent-free and
mutation-free; every command is read-only on the manuscript.

BREAKING CHANGE: /check-voice and /check-continuity are removed
(superseded by /check-consistency). The line-editor agent is
removed (use /proofread for reporting; the writer makes the edits).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude-plugin/marketplace.json

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
     {
       "name": "fiction-assistance",
       "source": "./fiction-assistance",
-      "description": "General-purpose fiction-writing guidance and analysis — story stats, continuity and voice checks, representation tests, developmental and strategic review, world-building extraction, timeline construction, and a line-editor agent."
+      "description": "General-purpose fiction-writing guidance and analysis — proofreading, consistency and believability, story stats, representation tests, developmental and strategic review, world-building extraction, timeline construction, final-review synthesis. Reports only; never edits."
     }
   ]
 }

fiction-assistance/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
 {
   "name": "fiction-assistance",
-  "version": "2.0.0",
+  "version": "2.1.0",
-  "description": "General-purpose fiction-writing guidance and analysis — story statistics, continuity and voice checks, representation tests, developmental and strategic review, research/world-building extraction, timeline construction, and a line-editor agent. Operates on manuscript text via arguments; outputs to the conversation rather than a fixed vault layout.",
+  "description": "General-purpose fiction-writing guidance and analysis. Nine commands covering proofreading, consistency and believability, story statistics, representation tests, developmental and strategic review, research/world-building extraction, timeline construction, and final-review synthesis. Reports to the conversation; never edits the manuscript.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Adam Knight"
   },
-  "keywords": ["fiction", "writing", "novel", "editing", "review", "manuscript"]
+  "keywords": ["fiction", "writing", "novel", "review", "proofreading", "manuscript"]
 }

fiction-assistance/agents/line-editor.md

@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
----
-name: line-editor
-description: Use this agent when you need to polish and refine text at the sentence and paragraph level while preserving the author's voice and intent.
-tools: Edit, MultiEdit, Write, NotebookEdit, WebFetch, WebSearch, ListMcpResourcesTool, ReadMcpResourceTool
-model: haiku
----
-
-You are a skilled line editor with expertise in refining prose at the sentence and paragraph level. Your primary responsibility is to enhance clarity, flow, and readability while strictly preserving the author's unique voice, tone, and creative vision.
-
-Your editing approach focuses on:
-
-**Core Principles:**
-- Make minimal, surgical changes that improve without altering
-- Preserve every aspect of the author's voice and stylistic choices
-- Maintain the original tone, mood, and emotional impact
-- Respect deliberate word choices and sentence structures
-- Never impose your own style preferences
-
-**Technical Corrections:**
-- Fix grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors
-- Correct obvious typos and mechanical mistakes
-- Ensure consistent verb tenses and pronoun agreement
-- Address unclear pronoun references
-- Fix sentence fragments only if unintentional
-
-**Clarity Enhancements:**
-- Eliminate redundant words and phrases
-- Untangle confusing sentence structures
-- Improve word order for better flow
-- Replace unclear pronouns with specific nouns when necessary
-- Smooth awkward transitions between sentences
-
-**What You Will NOT Change:**
-- Character voice or dialogue patterns
-- Deliberate stylistic choices (fragments, run-ons, etc.)
-- Vocabulary level or complexity
-- Sentence length preferences
-- Paragraph structure or pacing
-- Creative metaphors or imagery
-- Genre conventions or specialized terminology
-
-**Process:**
-1. Read the entire passage to understand voice and intent
-2. Identify only clear errors and genuine clarity issues
-3. Make minimal changes that preserve the original meaning
-4. Verify that your edits maintain the author's voice
-5. Provide a brief summary of changes made
-
-**Output Format:**
-Present the edited text followed by a concise summary of changes, focusing on what was corrected rather than why. If no changes are needed, state that the text is already clean and well-written.
-
-Remember: Your role is to be invisible - readers should never detect that editing occurred. The author's voice should shine through unchanged.

fiction-assistance/commands/check-consistency.md

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+---
+description: Consistency and believability pass — author voice, character voice, behavior matches words, in-world coherence
+argument-hint: "[path, glob, or selection]"
+allowed-tools: [Read, Glob, Grep]
+---
+
+Read the material at `$ARGUMENTS` and assess whether the piece holds together: stable voices, characters who act like themselves, a world whose rules and inhabitants stay coherent. This is distinct from developmental review (which asks *"is this a good story?"*) — this asks *"is this a coherent story?"* Report findings; do not edit.
+
+## What to assess
+
+### 1. Author / narrator voice
+
+Across the whole piece (and across scenes if they differ):
+
+- **Diction and register** — does the narrator's word choice and formality stay stable? Where does it shift, and is the shift earned (POV change, time jump, emotional escalation) or accidental?
+- **Sentence rhythm and shape** — does the narrator's characteristic cadence hold?
+- **Attitudinal stance** — irony, warmth, distance, sympathy. Does the narrator's relationship to the material drift unintentionally?
+- **Tense and POV discipline** — slips between close-third and distant-third, between past and present, between focal characters within a scene
+
+### 2. Character voice
+
+For each character with meaningful dialogue or interior:
+
+- **Distinctiveness** — could a reader identify the speaker with tags removed? Test by sampling.
+- **Consistency** — does the voice hold across scenes and emotional registers?
+- **Overlap** — any two characters bleeding into each other?
+- **Growth versus drift** — does change in the character show up in the voice deliberately, or does the voice just wander?
+
+### 3. Words versus actions
+
+For each character of consequence:
+
+- **Stated values vs. choices** — does the character's behavior match what they say they believe, want, or fear? When the gap is deliberate (hypocrisy, self-deception), is it earning its space? When the gap looks accidental, flag it.
+- **Stated capabilities vs. demonstrated** — does the supposedly-shrewd character get fooled too easily? Does the supposedly-physical character avoid physical solutions? Either is a flag.
+- **Relationships vs. behavior** — do characters treat each other consistently with the relationship the text claims? Reported intimacy that doesn't show up in the prose, or coldness contradicted by warm gestures, are signals.
+- **Decisions under pressure** — would *this character*, as established, actually make *this choice* here? Or is the plot pushing them?
+
+### 4. In-world believability
+
+- **Rules of the world** — physical, magical, technological, social, economic. Do the rules established earlier hold later? Where they're bent, is it earned (revelation, breakthrough, exception with a cost) or convenient?
+- **Cause and consequence** — do actions have appropriate weight? Do injuries persist, do reputations propagate, do resources deplete, do secrets stay secret in proportion to who knows them?
+- **Setting plausibility** — given the world, do crowds behave like crowds, institutions like institutions, frontier towns like frontier towns? Or is the setting a backdrop that responds only to the protagonist?
+- **Coincidence and contrivance** — are improbable events seeded, or do they appear when the plot needs them? "And then…" beats that should be "but…" or "therefore…".
+- **Information economy** — does each character act on what they reasonably know, not on what the reader knows? Does plot-required ignorance feel real, or do characters fail to notice the obvious so the story can proceed?
+
+## Output format
+
+Per concern, when issues are found:
+
+- **Type** (author voice / character voice / words-vs-actions / world coherence / believability)
+- **Location** (chapter/scene with a short quoted excerpt)
+- **Issue** — what conflicts with what, with both references
+- **Severity** (minor — attentive readers might catch / moderate — careful readers will / major — breaks immersion)
+- **Why it matters** — what trust the issue costs the reader
+- **Suggested fix** — a concrete option, not just "address this"
+
+Close with:
+
+- **What's holding together well** — name the strongest threads of consistency so the writer doesn't sand them off in revision
+- **Priority fixes** — three to five concrete suggestions in order of impact
+- **Patterns to watch** — recurring slips the writer should look for in their own future drafts (e.g., "voice flattens in action scenes," "secondary characters share a register")
+
+Be honest but not pedantic. Distinguish between unearned drift (a problem) and deliberate variation (a feature). When in doubt, note the ambiguity rather than the verdict.

fiction-assistance/commands/check-continuity.md

@@ -1,41 +0,0 @@
----
-description: Check a manuscript for continuity problems — plot holes, character inconsistencies, world-building contradictions
-argument-hint: "[path, glob, or selection]"
-allowed-tools: [Read, Glob, Grep]
----
-
-Read the manuscript at `$ARGUMENTS` (a file, a glob of chapters, or pasted text) and identify continuity issues. Report what you find directly to the conversation.
-
-## What to check
-
-### Character consistency
-- **Traits and personality** — does the character act consistently across scenes?
-- **Physical description** — height, eye color, age, scars, clothing — any contradictions?
-- **Knowledge** — do they know something in chapter 4 that they shouldn't learn until chapter 7?
-- **Relationships** — do established relationships develop consistently or shift without cause?
-- **Speech patterns** — does their voice stay recognizable?
-- **Motivations** — do their goals stay aligned with what's been established?
-
-### World-building consistency
-- **Rules of the universe** — physics, magic, technology limits, social structures
-- **Geography and locations** — distances, layouts, travel times
-- **History and timeline** — past events referenced consistently
-- **Cultural and political details** — group behaviors, hierarchies, allegiances
-
-### Plot logic
-- **Information flow** — how does each character learn what they know? Track it
-- **Cause and effect** — does each consequence have a setup?
-- **Object and detail persistence** — items, wounds, weather, time of day
-- **Pacing of revelations** — anything resolved before it was a problem, or set up and never paid off
-
-## Output format
-
-For each issue found:
-
-- **Type** (character / world / plot)
-- **Location** (chapter/scene, with quoted context where possible)
-- **Issue** (what contradicts what, with both references)
-- **Severity** (minor — reader probably won't catch / moderate — attentive readers will / major — breaks the story)
-- **Suggested fix** (a concrete option, not just "address this")
-
-Close with a short summary of the most load-bearing issues — the three to five the writer should fix first.

fiction-assistance/commands/check-voice.md

@@ -1,41 +0,0 @@
----
-description: Analyze character voice — consistency, distinctiveness, and development
-argument-hint: "[path, glob, or selection]"
-allowed-tools: [Read, Glob, Grep]
----
-
-Read the manuscript at `$ARGUMENTS` and analyze how distinct and consistent each character's voice is. Report findings to the conversation.
-
-## What to analyze
-
-For each named character with meaningful dialogue:
-
-### Speech profile
-- **Vocabulary** — formal/informal, technical/plain, characteristic word choices
-- **Sentence shape** — short/long, complete/fragmented, complex/simple
-- **Rhythm** — clipped, flowing, interrupted, deliberate
-- **Emotional register** — how they show anger, fear, affection, humor
-- **Background markers** — regional, generational, professional, cultural cues that appear in speech
-
-### Consistency
-- Does the voice hold across scenes and chapters?
-- Does it adapt appropriately under stress, with different conversational partners, or across an arc — or does it slip and re-form without reason?
-- Does any growth in the character show up *in the voice* rather than only in the narration?
-
-### Distinctiveness
-- Could a reader identify the speaker with the dialogue tags removed? Test by sampling unattributed lines.
-- Are any two characters bleeding into each other? Name the overlap.
-- Are any characters' voices so close to the narrator's that they don't stand out?
-
-## Output format
-
-Per character (focus on the major ones):
-
-- **Voice profile** — 2-3 sentences capturing the signature
-- **Sample lines** — 2-3 quoted lines that exemplify the voice
-- **Consistency** — strong / mostly stable / drifts; cite the strongest example and any slip
-- **Distinctiveness** — distinctive / shared traits with [other character] / undifferentiated
-
-Close with:
-- **Overall assessment** — which voices are working, which need work
-- **Priority fixes** — three to five concrete suggestions ordered by impact

fiction-assistance/commands/proofread.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+---
+description: Proofread and line-edit pass — grammar, tense, punctuation, spelling, mechanical errors. Reports issues; does not edit.
+argument-hint: "[path, glob, or selection]"
+allowed-tools: [Read, Glob, Grep]
+---
+
+Read the text at `$ARGUMENTS` and identify mechanical and sentence-level problems. Report what you find — **do not edit the file**. The writer is making the changes themselves.
+
+## What to check
+
+### Grammar and mechanics
+- **Verb tense** — consistency within a sentence, paragraph, and across the piece; unintended slips between past and present
+- **Subject-verb agreement** — number, person, indefinite pronouns
+- **Pronoun-antecedent agreement** — number, gender, unclear reference
+- **Modifiers** — dangling, misplaced, squinting
+- **Parallelism** — in lists, comparisons, correlative conjunctions
+
+### Punctuation and conventions
+- **Commas** — splices (unless deliberate), missing commas after introductory phrases, serial comma consistency
+- **Semicolons, colons, dashes** — used correctly and consistently
+- **Quotation marks and dialogue tags** — punctuation inside/outside, comma vs. period before tags, paragraph breaks per speaker
+- **Apostrophes** — possessive vs. plural, *its* vs. *it's*
+- **Hyphenation** — compound modifiers, hanging hyphens, en/em dash usage
+- **Capitalization** — proper nouns, titles, after colons, in dialogue
+
+### Spelling and word choice
+- **Misspellings** — including names that drift across the manuscript
+- **Homophones** — their/there/they're, your/you're, peek/peak/pique, etc.
+- **Confused words** — affect/effect, fewer/less, who/whom, lie/lay, etc.
+- **Repeated words** — accidental doubles, awkward proximity repetition
+
+### Sentence-level clarity
+- **Sentence fragments** — unintentional vs. stylistic; flag the unintentional ones
+- **Run-ons and comma splices** — flag unless clearly deliberate for voice
+- **Awkward constructions** — passive where active would be clearer, nominalization piles, tangled syntax
+- **Word order** — modifier placement, sentence rhythm
+- **Tightening opportunities** — redundancies, throat-clearing phrases, weak intensifiers (very, really, quite, just), filter words (saw, heard, felt, noticed) when they distance the reader
+
+### Style consistency
+- **Spelling/style variants** — US vs. UK, *grey/gray*, *-ize/-ise*, etc. Pick one and flag drift
+- **Number formatting** — when to spell out, when to use digits
+- **Time, date, and unit formatting**
+- **Italics, bold, small caps** — consistency for thoughts, emphasis, foreign words, titles
+
+## Output format
+
+For each issue:
+
+- **Location** — chapter/scene/line if known, with a short quoted excerpt
+- **Issue type** — one of the categories above
+- **What's wrong** — concrete diagnosis
+- **Suggested fix** — show the corrected version, not just the rule
+
+Group issues by type so the writer can attack one category at a time. Close with:
+
+- **Summary** — total issues by category
+- **Patterns** — recurring problems the writer should watch for in future drafts (e.g., "consistent tense-slip in interior-thought passages")
+
+Be a careful reader, not a pedant. Don't flag stylistic choices that read as deliberate — fragments for voice, comma splices for rhythm, dialogue that breaks rules to sound right. Note them only if a choice looks accidental.