Most authors know they should hire an editor. Far fewer know what that process actually looks like — what the editor is doing for those weeks the manuscript is with them, what you'll receive when they send it back, and what your role is once you have the feedback in hand.

Understanding the process makes you a better client and helps you evaluate whether an editor's approach matches what you need. It also helps you spot the warning signs that someone isn't operating professionally.

Step 1: The sample edit

Before anything else — before contracts, before payment, before you commit — a professional editor will offer you a sample edit. This means editing a portion of your manuscript, typically 10 to 20 pages, so you can see exactly what their feedback looks like before you decide whether to hire them.

Some editors offer sample edits free of charge; others charge a reduced rate for the sample and credit it toward the full engagement. Either is reasonable. What isn't reasonable is an editor who refuses to provide a sample or pressures you to commit to a full engagement without one.

The sample edit serves two purposes. It lets you evaluate the quality and depth of the editor's work. And it lets the editor evaluate your manuscript — what state it's in, what issues it has, whether it's the right fit for their expertise.

Step 2: The intake process

Once you decide to work together, a professional editor will walk you through an intake process before beginning work. This typically includes:

  • A questionnaire about your goals for the manuscript, your intended audience, your publishing path (traditional or self-publishing), and any specific concerns you have about the work.
  • A timeline agreement — the date by which they'll deliver the edited manuscript, and any revision rounds included in the engagement.
  • A discussion of format — whether feedback will come as inline comments, an editorial letter, or both, and in what document format.
  • A contract specifying the scope of work, the fee, the payment schedule, and the revision policy.

The contract matters. It protects both parties and establishes clear expectations. Be cautious of editors who want to proceed without one.

Step 3: How editors actually read your manuscript

Professional editors don't just read your manuscript once and start marking it up. Most use a multi-pass approach:

First pass (big picture): The editor reads the manuscript straight through without making notes, the way a reader would — forming impressions of the structure, pacing, character development, and overall effect. This pass is about experiencing the manuscript as a whole before analyzing it.

Second pass (structural and scene-level): The editor reads again, this time analytically — identifying the specific places where structural issues manifest, where pacing breaks down, where character behavior feels unmotivated. This is when they're building the editorial letter and flagging scenes for inline notes.

Third pass (line-level, for copy editors): Copy editors work through the manuscript line by line on their final pass, editing for clarity, word choice, consistency, rhythm, and mechanical correctness. This pass is slower and more granular than the first two.

What an editorial letter looks like

The editorial letter is the primary deliverable from a developmental edit, and it's worth knowing what a good one contains. A strong editorial letter follows a consistent structure:

  • Overview: The editor's overall impression — what the manuscript is trying to do, and whether it succeeds. This is where they establish the frame for everything that follows.
  • Strengths: What's working and why — not empty reassurance, but specific identification of craft elements that are effectively executed. This matters because it tells you what not to change.
  • Development areas: The core issues, organized by category (structure, character, pacing, POV), with specific examples from the manuscript. A good editor doesn't just name the problem — they trace it through the manuscript and explain its effect on the reader.
  • Specific recommendations: Concrete, actionable suggestions for revision. Not "the second act drags" but "chapters 12–17 are all reactive; consider introducing a new complication at the chapter 14 midpoint to restore momentum."

Inline comments vs editorial letter

Most developmental editors deliver both an editorial letter and inline margin comments in the manuscript document. The letter covers patterns and big-picture issues; the inline comments flag the specific moments in the text where those patterns appear. Together, they give you the diagnostic overview and the granular evidence.

Copy editors typically work almost entirely through inline markup — tracked changes in Word or a similar format — rather than a separate editorial letter. Some copy editors include a short style sheet summarizing the decisions they made (whether they followed Chicago or AP style, how they handled a recurring stylistic choice) and a brief note on the most significant issues they found.

What happens after you get the edit back

Receiving an editorial letter is not the end of the process — it's the beginning of a revision stage that many authors underestimate. A developmental edit in particular often triggers a substantial revision: restructuring acts, rewriting character motivations, adding or removing subplots. This can take months.

Most developmental editing engagements include at least one follow-up conversation with the editor after you've had time to read the letter and ask questions. Some include a second read pass after you've revised, though this is usually charged separately.

Practical tip: When you receive your editorial letter, read it once without taking notes — just absorb it. Then wait 24 hours before responding or beginning revisions. Editorial feedback can feel overwhelming or even upsetting on first read. Distance helps you receive it as useful data rather than verdict.

Red flags: editors who aren't operating professionally

The editorial services market is unregulated, and the quality range is enormous. These are the warning signs that an editor may not be worth hiring:

  • No sample edit offered. Any professional editor will show you their work before you commit.
  • Turnaround of under a week on a full novel-length manuscript. A thorough editorial pass on 80,000 words takes time. Anyone who can turn it around in three days is not reading carefully.
  • No contract. Scope creep, missed deadlines, and disputes about what was promised are much harder to resolve without a written agreement.
  • Generic feedback that could apply to any manuscript — vague notes about "pacing" and "character development" without specific examples or page references.
  • No relevant credentials or client references. Editorial work is a skill that develops over time. An editor who has worked with authors in your genre, or who can point to client testimonials and published books they've edited, is a safer bet than someone with no verifiable track record.

What professional editorial feedback looks like at scale

One thing experienced authors learn quickly: the quality of editorial feedback varies far more than the price does. Some expensive editors deliver generic letters that don't identify the real issues. Some affordable editors provide devastatingly precise, useful feedback that changes the manuscript fundamentally.

The best way to calibrate your expectations is to get feedback on a chapter or two before committing to a full engagement — whether that's through a professional editor's sample edit, a critique group, or a service like EditRoast that delivers editorial-quality chapter notes quickly. Understanding what your specific manuscript's issues are before you hire makes you a much better judge of whether the editor you're considering is actually addressing them.