Read access is real
A reviewer opens the manuscript in review mode with no editing surface and no write permission behind it. You can hand a draft to a subject expert without wondering what they might touch.
Invite editors and reviewers, keep comments attached to the manuscript, and share a frozen snapshot that never exposes the edits you make afterwards.
Start writing free
ROUGH NOTES → STRUCTURE → LONG FORM
Two kinds of collaborator can be brought into a project. An editor writes: documents, notes, sources and comments. A reviewer reads and comments, and any attempt to change the work is refused by the server itself, not merely hidden behind a greyed-out button in the interface.
Feedback usually arrives scattered across email threads, chat messages and a document nobody is certain is current. The writer becomes an archivist. Keeping comments on the manuscript, and freezing what reviewers see, removes both halves of that problem, and it costs nothing on any plan.
The owner adds a collaborator by the email address on their Strut account and picks reviewer or editor. A role can be changed later by adding the same person again with the other one, and every invitation is logged.
Anyone with access can leave a comment on the open document, optionally quoting the passage it refers to. The quotation is stored with the comment, so the reference survives even after the surrounding text has been rewritten.
Owners and editors mark a comment resolved once it has been acted on, and can reopen it if the fix did not hold. Resolved comments stay visible rather than vanishing, which keeps the reasoning behind a revision available.
Creating a review link captures the document exactly as it stands. Add a password, choose an expiry of 24 hours, 7 days or 30 days, or leave it open. Later edits stay private until you refresh the snapshot.
One button revokes the link and it stops working for everyone immediately. A link that has passed its expiry date returns a plain notice explaining that the material is closed, without exposing any of it.
A reviewer opens the manuscript in review mode with no editing surface and no write permission behind it. You can hand a draft to a subject expert without wondering what they might touch.
The snapshot is a fixed copy, so a review round cannot fracture across three different drafts. Meanwhile you carry on revising in the live document without confusing the people you asked for help.
Comments, resolutions, reopenings and each collaborator added are recorded in the project history beside version and AI events. Six months later, the reason a section changed is still on record.
Not as a collaborator; reviewer and editor roles need an account so that actions can be attributed to a person. To include an outsider, send a review snapshot link, which opens in any browser without signing in.
The owner and anyone holding the editor role. Reviewers may raise as many comments as they like but cannot mark them settled, which keeps that decision with the people accountable for the manuscript when it ships.
No. It shows the copy taken when the link was created or last refreshed. Refreshing is a deliberate action you take from the collaboration panel, so a half-finished revision is never published to a reviewer by accident.
Set a password when you create the link and readers must enter it before the manuscript appears. Pair that with an expiry date so an old link cannot keep circulating months after the review has closed.
Give your rough notes
somewhere to go.
Projects, notes, versioned drafts, imported sources, and careful AI assistance in one private workspace.