The product owner leaves one comment: “Automatic assignment isn’t available yet.” Easy fix? Only if the promise appears once. In a real tutorial, it may also be in the title, opening, screen instructions and recap.
We’ll use Claude Code to revise an existing team-inbox tutorial as a small project change. Kabo, an AI agent for creator research, can be installed as a Claude Code plugin and helps when the correction leaves an explanation gap. The current product facts still come from our own approved materials. For a first draft built from footage, start with the Codex script playbook.
1. Turn the correction into a reviewable change request
Our authored example starts with an old draft that promises an automatic handoff. The updated fact says the viewer must assign an owner manually. The viewer can still learn a useful action; the promise and demonstration need to match it.
Save the small note below as change-request.md. This makes the correction explicit before Claude Code searches the project.
Approved correction: Automatic assignment is not available in this release. Supported action: A user manually assigns the conversation owner. Keep: The lesson about making ownership visible to the team. Check: Title, opening promise, demo actions, recap and recording notes. Approval source: [current product document / reviewer].
Collect the approved draft and the correction
No existing draft? Start from the recorded action list with the prompt below, review the resulting script, then use the correction process when facts change. The footage-first script guide goes deeper on choosing those assets.
[ ] drafts/script-v1.md — Existing narration, beat IDs and screen directions. [ ] product-facts.md — Current supported behavior; roadmap items separately labeled. [ ] change-request.md — Exact correction, source and the person who approved it. [ ] voice.md — Approved writing sample and audience level. [ ] recording-plan.md — Demo workspace, recorded takes and screens still available. [ ] claims.md — Script claims mapped to approved facts; create if missing. [ ] title-caption.md — Packaging text to check with the script.
Read product-facts.md, recording-plan.md and voice.md. Using the recorded viewer actions in their supplied order, write drafts/script-v1.md with stable beat IDs, spoken lines, screen directions and approved fact references. Mark any action not supported by the demo as a recording gap. Create claims.md from the factual promises in the draft. Do not imply roadmap features are available.
2. Find dependent passages before changing any lines
Open Claude Code in the project. Ask it to inspect the supplied files and return an impact list with beat IDs and reasons. A keyword match is a starting point: “the next person sees who owns it” may still be true, while “the system chooses the next person” depends on the removed feature.
Review the list. Keep valid teaching points instead of deleting every sentence about assignment.
Read change-request.md and product-facts.md, then inspect drafts/script-v1.md, claims.md, title-caption.md and recording-plan.md. Return an impact list: file, beat/passage, dependency on the corrected fact, keep/change/question and reason. Include implicit promises, not only exact keyword matches. Do not edit yet.
3. Approve a focused patch and a rerecording list
An illustrative patch replaces “The inbox assigns the owner for you” with “Choose the teammate who will handle this conversation.” The screen direction must now show the manual control. If the opening promised a hands-off system, update that promise too.
Ask Claude Code to save a new draft and explain the changed beats. Recorded takes that still demonstrate the wrong behavior need to appear on the rerecording list; a corrected Markdown file alone does not fix them.
Apply only the impact decisions I approved. Write drafts/script-v2.md and changes.md with old/new passage, beat ID and supporting fact. Update screen actions and title-caption.md only where they depend on the correction. Preserve the approved original. Produce rerecord.md listing affected recorded takes and missing screen captures; do not claim the video files were edited.
Connect Kabo when the rewrite needs reference research
Open the content project, install Kabo for Claude Code and complete sign-in. For a direct server connection, follow the setup guide.
4. Use references if the manual step needs a clearer explanation
If we’re stuck explaining why manual ownership matters, use Kabo to inspect public tutorials for teaching choices. Retain actual source URLs and short evidence notes. A reference may suggest showing the unassigned and assigned states side by side; it cannot establish our product’s available controls.
If the correction is already clear, skip this research pass. For a wider study, follow the Claude Code research guide.
Use Kabo for a small reference pass on explaining manual conversation ownership. Report relevant explanation choices with actual sources and evidence limits. Suggest one way to clarify our corrected beat using the screens in recording-plan.md. Treat product-facts.md as the authority for our feature claims; do not reopen unrelated script sections.
5. Release a recording packet the editor can trust
Have the producer open script-v2.md with changes.md and rerecord.md. Check that the assigned-owner state is visible and that the opening now promises the lesson we actually teach. Keep a clear approved version so the old take does not slip back into the cut.
Use Descript or your existing editor to replace the affected recording. For a voice issue limited to the first few lines, the Claude Code Hook guide focuses on the spoken opening.
Compare script-v2.md, title-caption.md and recording-plan.md with the approved correction. List any remaining automatic-assignment promise, unmatched screen instruction or recorded take still requiring replacement. Check that unchanged beats remain intact. Return outstanding items for producer approval; do not publish.
Worked examples are illustrative. Product screenshots show existing Kabo web results, not a run of the example in this guide. Use your own materials and the evidence returned in your task.