open sourceWINDOWS · EDITORIAL TOOL · C#
CHC Review Studio
if a review says something is wrong, it should be able to prove where that conclusion came from.
a local-first Windows workbench that keeps source text, evidence, rubric decisions, findings and grades connected.
comments are cheap. evidence trails are harder.

what it is
A local-first Windows workbench for evidence-led editorial review, source-anchored findings, canon checks, and transparent S–F grading.
aug 30, 2026: Released a local-first workbench that keeps source text, rubric evidence, findings, canon decisions, and grading in one trail.
the annoying bit.
i wanted one place where a reviewer could prove why a comment or grade exists.
so the source, evidence, rubric and decision all stay connected.
what was actually wrong.
Review work gets unreliable when the source, rubric, evidence, comments, and final decision live in separate tools. Scores drift away from proof, and useful feedback can quietly turn into ghostwriting.
what i actually built.
One keyboard-friendly workflow combines a read-only source viewer, weighted rubrics, exact evidence anchors, structured findings, canon classifications, tier caps, recovery files, and editorial exports.
important detailsthe technical bits.
- Read-only DOCX and text viewer with outline, selection, and search
- Weighted Entry, Story, and Group of Interest rubrics with visible 0–4 ratings
- Source-anchored evidence, findings, corrections, severity, and resolution states
- S–F grading with completion safeguards and explicit cap precedence
- Atomic saves, rotating backups, recovery, and source-change detection
- Editorial HTML reports and detailed CSV comment logs
countedactual numbers.
- weighted rubrics
- 3
- rating scale
- 0–4
- telemetry
- 0
what workedwhere it is now.
A reviewer can trace a final tier back to criteria and source evidence. The app runs locally, sends no telemetry, and does not need a network connection.
stackbuilt with.
- C#
- WPF
- .NET
- PowerShell
- JSON
- HTML export