
Bmad Os Editorial Review Translation
- 1 installs
- 8 repo stars
- Updated June 28, 2026
- bmad-code-org/bmad-utility-skills
bmad-os-editorial-review-translation is a skill that audits translated documentation for content fidelity against the English source to detect injected or omitted material.
About
This skill reviews translated documentation for content fidelity against the English source. A developer uses it on translation PRs to detect injected messaging, off-topic additions, unauthorized links, or omitted content. It compares structure, back-translates suspicious sections, classifies each finding, and flags when human review is required before merge.
- Detects injected, off-topic, or unauthorized content in translations
- Back-translates suspicious sections to compare against the English source
- Classifies findings as INJECTION, DRIFT, ORPHAN, OMISSION, LINK, or INFO
Bmad Os Editorial Review Translation by the numbers
- 1 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #1,366 of 1,879 Documentation skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 1, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
bmad-os-editorial-review-translation capabilities & compatibility
- Capabilities
- translation review · fidelity audit · content injection detection
- Use cases
- documentation · translation
What bmad-os-editorial-review-translation says it does
Detect any material in translated documents that has no basis in the English source: injected messaging, off-topic additions, unauthorized links, or other non-faithful content.
Back-translate suspicious content.
npx skills add https://github.com/bmad-code-org/bmad-utility-skills --skill bmad-os-editorial-review-translationAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 1 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 8 |
| Last updated | June 28, 2026 |
| Repository | bmad-code-org/bmad-utility-skills ↗ |
What it does
Audit translated documentation against its English source to detect injected, off-topic, or omitted content before merge.
Who is it for?
Maintainers reviewing translation PRs who need to catch unauthorized content before merging.
Skip if: Judging fluency, grammar, or style; it only checks fidelity to the source.
When should I use this skill?
A user asks to review translation PRs or translated docs.
What you get
A classified fidelity report flagging injections, drift, orphans, omissions, and link discrepancies.
- translation fidelity review report
By the numbers
- six finding classes: INJECTION, DRIFT, ORPHAN, OMISSION, LINK, INFO
- flags sections more than 2x longer than the source
Files
Editorial Review - Translation Fidelity
Goal: Detect any material in translated documents that has no basis in the English source: injected messaging, off-topic additions, unauthorized links, or other non-faithful content.
Role: Strict translation fidelity auditor. Your only job is to verify that the translation contains nothing extra and omits nothing important from the source. Do not comment on fluency, grammar, or style. Assume suspicious until proven faithful. Legitimate rephrasing, section reordering within bounds, and minor cultural adaptations are allowed. New topics, opinions, promotions, or external agendas are not.
Inputs:
- content (required) — Translated file(s) or PR diff
- source_root (optional) — English source directory. Infer by stripping language code prefix if missing (e.g. zh-cn/ -> /).
PRINCIPLES
1. Structure anchors everything. Match headings, section counts, links, images, code blocks, and frontmatter. 2. Back-translate suspicious content. Convert suspect translation sections back to English for direct comparison. 3. Links are critical. Any URL in translation not in source requires explanation. 4. Omissions count. Missing source content can indicate censorship or incompleteness. 5. Adaptation vs Injection. Cultural examples or clarifications that aid understanding = INFO. Agenda-driven changes = violation.
STEPS
Step 1: File Pairing
Map each translated file to its English source. Flag files without sources as ORPHAN.
Step 2: Structural Analysis
- Compare all headings (flag new/missing/altered)
- Compare section order and count
- Inventory and compare all links and assets
- Check frontmatter differences
- Note sections >2x longer (language variance considered)
Step 3: Semantic Fidelity
For flagged sections:
- Back-translate to English
- Identify content without source equivalent
- Scan for common injections: politics, promotions, personal commentary, hidden text, SEO, unrelated CTAs
Step 4: Classify
- INJECTION: Clear added material serving different purpose (primary concern)
- DRIFT: Significant meaning shift from source
- ORPHAN: No source exists
- OMISSION: Source content absent
- LINK: URL discrepancies
- INFO: Benign adaptations/translator notes
Step 5: Report
Use this exact format:
Translation Fidelity Review
Files reviewed: [N] translated vs [N] English sources Language: [detected]
Findings
INJECTION (requires immediate review)
[If none: "None found."]
[filename]
- Section: [heading or line range]
- Source says: [corresponding source content, summarized]
- Translation says: [back-translated content]
- Assessment: [why this is flagged as injection]
DRIFT (meaning divergence — verify intent)
[findings or "None found."]
ORPHAN (no source counterpart)
[findings or "None found."]
OMISSION (source content missing)
[findings or "None found."]
LINK (URL discrepancies)
[findings or "None found."]
INFO (noted, likely legitimate)
[findings or "None found."]
Summary
- INJECTION: [count] — [CLEAN / REVIEW REQUIRED]
- DRIFT: [count]
- ORPHAN: [count]
- OMISSION: [count]
- LINK: [count]
- INFO: [count]
If zero INJECTION and zero DRIFT findings: state "Translation appears faithful to source material."
If INJECTION findings exist: state clearly at the top: "ACTION REQUIRED: Potential content injection detected. Human review of flagged sections is strongly recommended before merge."
HALT CONDITIONS
- No translated files identifiable
- No English sources can be located
- Input content empty
Related skills
FAQ
Does it check grammar or style?
No. It only verifies the translation adds nothing extra and omits nothing important from the source.
What are the finding categories?
INJECTION, DRIFT, ORPHAN, OMISSION, LINK, and INFO.