Most of us remember writing book reviews in school, but reviewing a technical book is often an entirely different beast. Instead of simply commenting on whether you liked a story or not, you’re weighing in on clarity, correctness, practical relevance, and even market positioning. With so many potential elements, figuring out how to give meaningful feedback can be tricky. Yet it doesn’t have to be.
This post provides guidance on how to review a technical book without feeling overwhelmed, complete with some real-world considerations and tips for providing the most valuable critique possible.
Experts and copywriters not required
First and foremost, you do NOT need to be a subject matter expert to be a helpful technical reviewer. In fact, if you’re more of a beginner or an “outsider” to the topic, you may spot coverage gaps or leaps in logic that an expert might skip right over. Authors who have deep expertise sometimes forget how confusing certain concepts can be for newcomers.
If you find yourself having trouble following a particular section or you’re uncertain about a key term, that’s very useful data for the writer! It’s likely many potential readers will share your skill level, so your struggles will reflect those of a large chunk of the target audience. Even if you only have a passing familiarity with the subject matter, your fresh perspective is often invaluable.
Second, keep in mind that your role is not to be a copyeditor. It’s so easy to get hung up on spelling errors or minor grammatical goofs, but remember: a professional copyeditor will handle these issues later. If you’re reviewing a manuscript, your energy is far better spent focusing on the larger picture—accuracy, flow, and whether the content is as comprehensive and comprehensible as it needs to be.
That doesn’t mean you should never mark something that jars you or is riddled with typos, but do so sparingly. If you see persistent patterns that confuse you (maybe the same acronyms are introduced differently in various chapters), you can point that out to the author so it can be addressed globally. But resist the urge to red-pen every comma splice; it’s not your job as a tech reviewer, and it will only take away from time you could spend on more critical feedback.
The same applies to screenshots and code blocks. If they’re outright incorrect or if you believe another should be added, it’s worth pointing out. However, if a screenshot is awkwardly sized on the page, that’s something that typesetting will address. Ditto for code blocks that extend beyond the page margin. If the content is cut off in a way that could confuse readers or lead to errors when trying to use the code, you should bring it up. If you simply don’t like the way the publisher’s standard code block appears on the page, that’s less pressing and actionable.
There’s a delicate balance between what’s an editorial issue and what pertains to content, but you’ll get the knack for it over time. But as a reviewer, your primary effort should be on the content itself and not its “packaging” or formatting.
What should you focus on?
Think of your job as part fact-checker, part marketing consultant.
As a fact-checker, you’re vetting the content’s accuracy and applicability. If it’s a hands-on or demo-oriented book, it’s incredibly helpful to walk through the exercises or code examples. Does the text match what you see on your screen? Do all the files load correctly, and are the instructions in sync with the version of the software you’re using?
Don’t hesitate to actually do the exercises if you have the time. Many authors will miss small details. Maybe the name of a function changed in a new software update, or a screenshot is out of date. By verifying these details now, you reduce the chance of publishing an error that will frustrate readers.
As for marketing, you want to consider how the book fits into the broader landscape of available resources. Is the author clear about their target audience? Who do you believe the book is actually serving? Does the manuscript feel advanced while claiming to be introductory, or vice versa?
Compare the project against similar titles on the market. If you’re aware of other books, online courses, or documentation covering the same topic, think about how this manuscript differs from them. Does it offer unique insights or a distinct approach?
For instance, if you notice the author is glossing over simpler explanations when the book is geared toward a general audience, let them know. If you suspect the real audience for the book is more specialized, encourage the author to rewrite the introduction or reframe certain chapters. By doing this, you’re helping the author carve out a clearer niche and set realistic reader expectations.
Questions to guide your review
When diving into the manuscript, you might consider a few important points—some of which come straight from practical review questionnaires. (You don’t have to use all of them, but they can spark ideas for your critique.)
- Target audience: Who does this book seem aimed at, and is that audience explicitly addressed? If the author claims to be writing for beginners but jumps headfirst into advanced equations, that’s a red flag.
- Scope and coverage: Does the book do what it promises to do based on the title or introduction? Are there areas that the author glosses over but you think deserve more depth? Sometimes just adding a definition or providing a short anecdote can clear up a lot of confusion.
- Organization and flow: Does the table of contents progress logically? Do some topics belong in earlier or later sections for better comprehension? Are certain transitions abrupt or unclear?
- Technical accuracy: If you have the means and time, verify the code snippets and examples. If you run into an error or discover that a section’s instructions don’t match the accompanying figures, flag it. This might be the single most valuable contribution a tech reviewer can make.
- Writing style: Even though you’re not doing copyediting, you can still comment on tone, voice, and clarity. A friendly, conversational tone might fit a beginner-friendly book, whereas a more academic tone could suit a highly specialized text.
Take your time here. A thorough review doesn’t mean reading every line with a microscope—it means strategically sampling key sections to see if they meet the needs of the target reader. If you ever find yourself seriously stuck or bored by the writing, that’s also feedback. Let the author know which passages made your eyes glaze over, or if a particular explanation was so dense that you had to reread it multiple times.
Writing a praise quote for marketing
Authors often appreciate it if you can provide a brief endorsement or “praise quote” for marketing purposes, once you feel comfortable doing so. These blurbs help potential readers figure out if the book is relevant to them and reassure them that it has been vetted by real readers.
Aim for something like a two-paragraph testimonial for more formal marketing copy and a shorter two-sentence version as a quick quote. In your longer testimonial, you might explain what you gained from the book (“Reading through the examples gave me a much better grasp on logistic regression than I had before!”), note who else might benefit (“Anyone with a basic knowledge of statistics will appreciate the clear, step-by-step instructions.”), and highlight what’s missing from competing resources (“The exercises here bridge a gap between theory and practice that I haven’t seen elsewhere.”). The shorter testimonial can be a punchy summation that highlights the biggest benefit and the target audience.
For example, you might write two paragraphs like this:
“I learned more about generalized linear models from one chapter of this book than I did from an entire semester’s worth of courses in college. The straightforward explanations, hands-on exercises, and real-world examples make it a must-read for any data analyst, especially those looking to ground their learning in solid fundamentals.
This book succeeds where other guides fall short, walking readers step by step through code, theory, and applied practice. If you’re someone who wants to level up your skills without getting lost in overly academic language, this is the perfect resource.”
Then, a two-sentence version could look like:
“A terrific guide to GLMs that walks readers from concept to code with clarity and depth. Perfect for data analysts who want to understand the ‘why’ and not just the ‘how.’”
Feel free to tweak the language so it suits your style and genuinely reflects your reading experience. Authentic endorsements go a long way in boosting a book’s credibility.
Conclusion
Reviewing a technical book is a balancing act between offering constructive criticism and championing the work’s strengths. Don’t feel pressured to cover every aspect of the manuscript. It’s more important that you highlight the parts that stand out to you, whether good or bad.
If something confuses you, say so. If you suspect a good portion of the audience will be lost by a certain chapter, mention it. It’s far better for the author to address those issues now than to have them appear in a poor review post-publication.
If you’re running the code, share if you encountered any problems with software versions, missing packages, or cryptic instructions. If the overall organization doesn’t make sense to you, suggest a different ordering of chapters or subheadings. Don’t be shy about suggesting that the author add a small anecdote or real-world example to clarify a point. Often, these small changes can transform a dry explanation into something memorable.
As you finalize your review, you might also reflect on how the book can be used in a professional or classroom setting. Would you recommend it to peers? Could you see it used as a standard text in a training course or as supplemental reading for an existing curriculum? This type of real-world consideration helps the author see where their work might slot into the market and how they can position it effectively.
Ultimately, your goal is to offer honest, constructive input that helps make the book better for its intended readers. Whether you’re an industry newbie or a seasoned pro, your perspective is valuable precisely because no single reviewer can see the manuscript from every angle.
Don’t sugarcoat your feedback. If you found something unclear, speak up. If you think the author is neglecting certain fundamentals, point it out. And if you discover that the book’s code examples are absolutely flawless, or its approach to explaining advanced mathematics is refreshingly clear, then make sure to celebrate that, too.
Have you ever done a technical review or asked someone to review your own manuscript? Share what tactics worked for you in the comments. And if you’re an author or editor, feel free to chime in with additional pointers on how best to support your reviewers.
Reviewing a technical book can be a very rewarding process, so enjoy the opportunity to both learn something new and help shape a manuscript that will educate countless others in the future.
Leave a Reply