Describe the factual difference
Oh Story’s chapter-revision method checks affected clues, time, reader knowledge and characters through the last written chapter. This worksheet adapts that process for authors. Wording changes that preserve facts need not trigger a whole-book rewrite.
Original manuscript: Chi Yao reads a duty register alone in chapter six and learns Mrs. Zhou collected tools. She questions Zhou about it in chapter nine. The revision instead locks the register in a cabinet before Chi can read it. Her later accusation now lacks a source.
Replacing “saw” with “realized” does not repair access. Determine whether the author removed the viewing process, the acquisition of information, or only its reveal timing. Those decisions have different consequences.
Example: follow dependencies
| Passage | Depends on | Decision |
|---|---|---|
| Chapter nine question | Chi read the collection entry | Remove certainty or establish a real earlier opportunity to learn |
| Chapter ten suspicion | Zhou answered an informed question | Check whether the revised interaction still causes this response |
| Chapter twelve public account | Others heard Zhou’s explanation | If the explanation no longer happens, they cannot already know it |
Record actual dependencies, not possible replacement plots. Adding a viewing scene requires decisions about access, witnesses, reader information and consequences.
If only reader timing changes, Chi may still know earlier, provided the chosen narrative supports that distribution. The author’s private knowledge cannot be freely assigned to a character.
Update records through the written endpoint
Not reading the register in chapter six does not prove Chi remains ignorant in chapter twelve. An existing chapter-eleven handover may give her the information. Check through the written endpoint and record acquisition, witnesses and current knowledge separately.
For objects, distinguish past possession, transfer and current owner. Removing a key loan must not erase unrelated resources later acquired. Preserve unaffected relationship promises and boundaries.
Oh Story rebuilds tracking through its revision workflow; manual notes can follow the same principle. Both require evidence in revised prose. Future reveals in an outline remain plans rather than reader knowledge.
Bound the repair pass
A repair brief names the original and revised fact, each dependent passage and its evidence, the author’s chosen authority, approved chapters, and the reread range.
Keep the original. Local changes need neighboring transitions; whole-chapter rewrites require fuller adjacent context. Revisit the impact table and close items only with evidence in revised prose.
If another existing event supplies the same knowledge, record it rather than enlarging the edit. Leave unresolved dependencies visible. Updating notes supports continuation but cannot repair an incorrect line already in the manuscript.
A Complete Repair: Ask, See, Then Bound Later Claims
Continue the register example. Suppose the author chooses to keep Chi ignorant of its contents in chapter six and let her learn the collection entry in chapter nine. This pass permits the dependent passages in chapters nine, ten and twelve to change. It also establishes that Zhou's existing duties let her show her own entry; Chi cannot browse the whole book. She is tracing these tools, without knowing in advance who collected them. This is an original editorial demonstration, not an executed project revision.
Chapter-nine candidate:
“Do you record tool handoffs in that book?” Chi pointed to the cabinet. “Could you check last week's receipt and return of these tools? I haven't seen the pages.”
“Which tools?” Zhou asked.
Chi identified the tools she was tracing. Zhou opened the cabinet, found the matching line and pointed to it. “I collected this one.”
Chi read the tool names, date and signature. “Who got the tools afterward?”
“The duty supervisor.” Zhou closed the book and returned it to the cabinet.
An actual response and showing now precede Chi's knowledge. One entry establishes neither the whole register nor the tools' final destination. The question follows an established search goal without presuming who collected the tools. Matching tool names connect this entry to the objects being traced. Zhou's statement about the supervisor remains a reported handoff, not independent verification.
Chapter-ten continuation:
Chi wrote: “Saw Zhou's collection entry. She says she passed the tools to the duty supervisor; unchecked.” She left a question for the supervisor rather than treating collection as proof that Zhou had kept them.
Chapter-twelve conversation:
Zhou and the equipment officer were present. Chi opened her notes. “All I saw was Zhou's collection entry. I haven't traced what happened afterward. I can't say she has the tools now.” The equipment officer repeated the handoff to investigate and agreed to ask the duty supervisor and check the records first.
Agreement to check does not establish the destination. These three heard the explanation; absent people do not acquire it automatically.
| Passage | Revised evidence and limits |
|---|---|
| Chapter six | Locked register; Chi has not read it, and this scene gives readers no collection details. |
| Chapter nine | One signed entry is seen and a reply heard; the whole book and complete destination remain unknown. |
| Chapter ten | Suspicion becomes an unchecked handoff; the next question is still planned. |
| Chapter twelve | Seen and unchecked facts are stated to those present; current tool possession is unknown, and Zhou has taken the register back. |
Removing the old opportunity now changes later acquisition, response and explanation rather than erasing their dependencies. In a real manuscript, cite the revised passages and trace through the written endpoint. Notes cannot fix an old line left in the prose. Retain a different valid acquisition already in the manuscript instead of automatically adding this inquiry.
FAQ
Does every wording edit need a full downstream scan?
If facts and information order are unchanged, check local transitions. Trace actual dependencies after changes to knowledge, possession, events or relationships.
Do it with the skill
Use $story-long-write to compare the original and revised chapter [X]. Trace changed events, clues, knowledge, ownership and relationships through the last written chapter [M], citing actual dependencies. Report impacts before editing later prose. After I specify scope, revise and retain unresolved items.
Read the method: Revision scope and downstream synchronization