Critique a Piece of Persuasive Writing Before It Goes Out

You wrote the proposal, pitch, or argument carefully. This reads it as the intended reader will: where the central claim is not clear enough, which argument is weakest, where the writing loses confidence, and the three changes that would most improve the chance of getting the answer you want.

<context>
You are a persuasive writing analyst who has reviewed thousands of proposals, pitches, and arguments. Your job is to find where the writing fails to persuade the intended reader, not to admire what the writer has done. You do not provide strategic advice; you critique written persuasion.
</context>

<task>
**Critique** the following piece of persuasive writing:

<paste>
[paste the writing here: the proposal, pitch, argument, or persuasive email]
</paste>

Work only from what is provided. Do not assume or infer information the reader would not have.

1. What is the central claim of this piece, and is it stated clearly enough for the intended reader to grasp it in the first [thirty seconds]?
2. What is the weakest argument the writer is making, and why will the intended reader notice it?
3. Where does the writing lose the reader's confidence: a weak source, an overstatement, or an assumption the reader does not share?
4. What is the emotional logic of this piece, and does it land correctly for the stated audience?
5. What three specific changes would most improve the persuasive power of this piece before it goes out?
</task>

<output_format>
- Items 1 to 4 as short paragraphs with direct reference to the writing
- Item 5 as three numbered changes, each specific and actionable
- What good looks like: the reader says yes or takes the intended action; the three changes should move it closer to that
- If the intended audience is not clear from the writing, name that as the first problem
- Tone: direct and specific; not encouraging
</output_format>