Readability Checker
Use this readability checker to get readability score, grade level, and readability issues, then apply focused fixes that improve readability before you publish.
Readability Checker
Paste English text and get structured output you can apply immediately.
Readability Score: 47.2 (Hard)
Score: 47.2 · Level: Grade Level: 11
Readability Score: 47.2
Grade Level: 11
Reading Time: 0.3 min
Detected Issues
What to fix first
- Split the sentence into two short action-focused lines.
- Replace abstract nouns with direct verbs and familiar wording.
- Move the main action earlier so readers understand intent immediately.
Key stats
- Reading Time: 0.3 min
- Words: 23
- Sentences: 1
Recommended rewrite direction
Start with one short statement that names the action and owner clearly, then keep supporting context in a second line. This structure improves scanability and keeps the original operational meaning intact.
What is a good readability score?
For blog posts
Aim for clear standard range so intros and transitions stay easy to scan.
For websites
Keep language direct to reduce bounce and improve CTA comprehension speed.
For help docs
Use easier ranges because procedural instructions must be executed without rereads.
For emails
Prioritize short lines with explicit action and timeline to reduce reply loops.
For legal/policy text
Accept moderate complexity, but simplify surrounding structure for non-legal readers.
How to interpret your readability score
90-100
Very easy
Best for quick consumer instructions and broad public communication with minimal decoding effort.
70-89
Easy
Strong range for websites, onboarding pages, and high-volume support documentation.
50-69
Standard
Usable for mixed audiences, but targeted edits usually improve trust and completion speed.
Below 50
Hard to read
Dense wording likely slows comprehension and hides key actions or constraints.
Readability formulas explained
| Formula | What it measures | Best for | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flesch Reading Ease | Sentence length and word syllable complexity | Fast web readability checks | Does not measure factual clarity |
| Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level | Approximate school grade needed to read comfortably | Website grade-level targeting | Can over-penalize required terms |
| Gunning Fog | Complex words and sentence length concentration | Business and editorial prose | Less precise for short snippets |
| SMOG | Polysyllabic word density in sentences | Formal content benchmarking | Needs enough text length for stability |
| Coleman-Liau | Character density and sentence ratios | Digital text with varied word forms | Ignores contextual wording quality |
| ARI | Character-based complexity and sentence load | Technical and operations writing | May not reflect tone clarity |
Readability score benchmarks by content type
| Content type | Typical target | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Landing page | 60-80 | Prioritize fast value comprehension and direct CTA lines. |
| Blog post | 55-75 | Balance depth with scanability for mixed reader expertise. |
| Help center | 65-85 | Instruction speed matters; reduce clause stacking and ambiguity. |
| Onboarding email | 60-80 | Keep action, owner, and sequence explicit in short lines. |
| Policy summary | 50-70 | Preserve constraints, but simplify surrounding legal structure. |
| Product description | 55-75 | Clarify benefits and limits without dense abstract phrasing. |
What affects readability?
sentence length
Long chains increase cognitive load and hide critical actions until the end of a clause-heavy line.
word difficulty
High-complexity vocabulary slows scanning, especially for mixed audiences and mobile readers under time pressure.
passive voice
Passive phrasing hides ownership and weakens action clarity in support, policy, and onboarding instructions.
paragraph density
Dense paragraphs bury key constraints and make users skip critical lines before they act.
jargon
Unexplained jargon increases decoding effort and lowers confidence in user-facing communication.
How to improve readability fast
- Split long sentences.
- Move main action earlier.
- Remove abstract nouns.
- Replace jargon where possible.
- Reduce passive voice.
- Shorten intros.
- Simplify transitions.
- Rewrite hard CTA lines.
- Rerun analysis on changed sections.
Before and after examples
Intro paragraph
Before: The implementation of this feature was facilitated by a robust process that stakeholders may find difficult to use quickly.
After: This feature uses a clear process, but stakeholders may still need faster onboarding guidance.
Product description
Before: Users are provided with functionality that enables optimization of operational throughput in dynamic environments.
After: Users can use this feature to improve workflow speed in changing conditions.
Help-center instruction
Before: Account recovery shall be initiated subsequent to verification of identity credentials and confirmation of ownership.
After: Start account recovery after you verify identity and confirm account ownership.
Before: In order to proceed, completion of the required setup sequence is recommended prior to deployment.
After: Please finish setup before deployment so the rollout can continue safely.
Policy sentence
Before: Non-compliance may result in remediation obligations being imposed unless an exception has been authorized.
After: If someone does not comply, remediation is required unless an approved exception exists.
Readability vs plain English
| Readability | Plain English |
|---|---|
| Measures reading difficulty and sentence structure. | Improves wording clarity and removes jargon. |
| Best for score benchmarking and issue prioritization. | Best for phrase-level simplification in legal, support, and policy text. |
Next steps: run text simplifier for dense paragraphs, check jargon with plain English checker, study the framework in what is readability, apply the checklist from how to improve readability, review readability before/after, and use the workflow in improve blog readability.
Example Input
The implementation of this solution was facilitated by a robust operational framework that can be difficult for stakeholders to utilize quickly.
Example Output
Readability Score: 47.2 (Hard). Grade Level: 11. Issues: long sentence, complex wording, passive voice risk.
Interpretation: split long structure, simplify wording, and rerun score benchmarks by content type.
How to use
- Paste your text.
- Run the tool.
- Review issues and apply improved output.
What this tool detects
- Long sentences
- Difficult words and jargon
- Readability score and grade level signals
- Passive voice patterns
- Hard-to-scan structure
- Overly dense writing
Who should use this tool
- SEO and content teams
- Blog editors
- Documentation writers
- UX and product copywriters
Benefits
- Benchmark readability score by content type
- Find clarity blockers before publishing
- Prioritize edits by issue impact
- Improve scanability and conversion clarity
- Validate rewrites with formula context
Checker vs Other Tools
- Use Readability Checker when you need diagnostics and scores before rewriting.
- Use Text Simplifier when your main goal is direct language simplification.
- Use Plain English Checker for jargon and formal-language cleanup.
- Use Reading Level Converter when you must hit a specific target level.
FAQ
It depends on page type, but broad web content usually performs better in standard-to-easy ranges.
Use a range that supports fast comprehension; SEO pages often win when readers can scan and act quickly.
Many teams start around Grade 8, then adjust upward only where technical precision requires it.
Use multiple formulas together and prioritize sections where several metrics signal the same friction.
No. Readability measures difficulty; plain English focuses on direct wording and removing jargon.
Yes. You can have a good score while still hiding key actions or constraints in weak structure.