If a writer has done their research on the revision process, has a plan of attack, trustful beta readers, critique group, etc.; what does a writer do if their primary concern is grammar? Should a writer hire an editor/proofreader prior to submitting, or is there a level of forgiveness if grammar isn't 100% perfect?
There's no right/wrong answer on this nor is there some kind of industry standard, but I will tell you that when I see grammar errors and misused words in the query, I know I'm going to find more of the same in the manuscript.
That means you've raised the bar for yourself at least one notch, maybe two. What that means is I'm less likely to read something. A manuscript that's a "maybe" is a "no". A manuscript that's an "interesting" is a "well, let's give it a page or two."
I can hear disgruntled writers saying "it can be fixed! You'll miss good stuff!" That's very true. That's also not the problem. The problem is time.
I won't send a manuscript on submission to an editor that's rife with mistakes. My goal is to send work out that has zero mistakes.
One of us will have to fix this stuff.
I vote for you.
My vote is the only one that counts.
It's also VERY hard not to get pulled out of the story when I find basic errors like it's/its, lie/lay etc.
When I get pulled out of the manuscript is code for "stops reading." You really don't want to have me stop reading.
Words are your tools. If you come to the job site with rusty, bent and broken tools, you're not going to be able to work efficiently or effectively.
If you need to invest in a grinder to sharpen your blade, I think it's a very good idea.