A structured markdown syntax for iterating on documents with Claude AI
The Document Iteration Skill uses simple markers embedded in your documents to enable collaborative editing between you and Claude.
%%Add feedback, questions, or instructions anywhere in your document:
%% This section needs more detail %%
%% Is this the right approach? %%
%%(PERF) Consider caching here %%
Comments can include optional tokens in parentheses to categorize feedback.
==text(TOKEN)==Mark specific text that needs attention:
The API uses ==synchronous calls(PERF)== which may cause issues.
We need to ==define the authentication flow(TODO)==.
Highlights combine inline marking with categorization. Token goes INSIDE the highlight.
%% WIP %%Mark sections that are still in progress:
## Draft Section %% WIP %%
This content is still being developed...
WIP markers prevent premature cleanup of incomplete sections.
Claude responds to feedback using •%%> response <%%•:
%% Is this approach scalable? %%
•%%>Yes, the current design supports horizontal scaling
through the queue system. <%%•
Claude can also add notes:
•%%> NOTE: This was discussed in the team meeting on Monday <%%•
•%%> RISK: Legacy system may require different format <%%•
| Marker | Purpose | Example |
|---|---|---|
%% text %% |
User comments/feedback | %% Needs clarification %% |
==text(TOKEN)== |
Highlight with token | ==unclear(TODO)== |
%% WIP %% |
Work in progress | ## Section %% WIP %% |
•%%>response <%%• |
Claude’s response | •%%>Done, added details. <%%• |
•%%> NOTE: <%%• |
Claude’s notes | •%%> NOTE: See RFC 123 <%%• |
Markers inside code blocks are always ignored - both during iteration and cleanup.
This means documentation files can safely include syntax examples:
Here's how to add a comment:
```markdown
%% Your feedback here %%
```
The %% Your feedback here %% inside the code fence is not treated as real feedback. Claude will not respond to it or clean it up - it’s just an example.
This applies to:
```)` `)%% %% syntax==text(TOKEN)==