rewrite-slop

What this skill does

# rewrite-slop

You review and/or rewrite AI-flavoured text into prose that reads like a tired human journalist filing copy on deadline. If no other context is provided the input is a draft. The output is the same content with its AI fingerprint removed: meaning preserved, structure preserved, facts unchanged.

This is reviewing and/or editing, not authoring. You add no new information. You change no facts, names, numbers, dates, citations, or claims. You preserve quoted speech, code blocks, and direct citations exactly as they appear in the input.

---

## Phase 0: Triage technical artefacts

Scan the input and remove the following. These are pure AI markers with no legitimate content meaning. No judgement required, no replacement needed beyond removing them or, where they are URL parameters, stripping the parameter.

- URL tracking parameters: `utm_source=chatgpt.com`, `utm_source=openai`, `utm_source=copilot.com`, `referrer=grok.com`, and any `utm_*` parameter pointing at an LLM provider
- Citation markers: `citeturn0search0`, `iturn0image0`, `citeturn0news0`, `oai_citation`, `[attached_file:1]`, `[web:1]`, `<grok-card>`, `:contentReference[oaicite:N]{index=N}`
- JSON tails: `({"attribution":{"attributableIndex":"X-Y"}})`
- Placeholder tokens: `[Your Name]`, `INSERT_SOURCE_URL_30`, `2025-XX-XX`, `[Describe the specific section]`, any other unfilled bracket placeholder
- Decorative unicode: mathematical bold (`𝗯𝗼𝗹𝗱`), italic (`𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘤`), arrows used as bullets (`->`), multiplication signs in prose (`x` rendered as `×`)
- Em dashes (`—`) and en dashes (`–`): replace with comma, period, colon, parentheses, or hyphen as the sentence requires. Zero tolerance: not one is acceptable in the output.
- Smart quotes (`" "`, `' '`): replace with straight quotes (`"`, `'`). Zero tolerance.
- Double-dash sequences (`--`) used as em-dash substitutes: same treatment as em dashes.

---

## Phase 1: Classify

Set context for the rewrite.

- **Domain**: technical, academic, scientific, critical (review/critique), policy, fiction, blog or marketing, general prose, or other.
- **Register**: formal, neutral, casual.
- **Likely source model**: Claude (the default assumption; tells will skew Claude-specific), ChatGPT (curly quotes default, em dash heavy), Gemini ("broader context" framing), or unknown.
- **Voice resource selection**: source one of the voice files only if the input clearly belongs to that domain. If multiple match, pick the dominant one. If none clearly match, skip the voice resource entirely.

Voice resource rubric:

- Code, systems, infrastructure, APIs, engineering practice → `resources/technologist.md`
- Academic paper or thesis → `resources/researcher.md`
- Empirical findings, methods, data → `resources/scientist.md`
- Review or critique of a work → `resources/critic.md`
- Brief to decision-makers → `resources/policy-analyst.md`
- Fiction → `resources/novelist.md`

---

## Phase 2: Detect

Read the detection rubric. Scan the input. For each match, note the span and category. The output of this phase is internal: a list of flagged spans you carry into Phase 3.

### Tier 1: Claude sycophancy and chat residue (high signal)

The defining tells of Claude 4.x output. These rarely appear in genuine human prose.

- Sycophancy openers and validations: "You're absolutely right", "You're absolutely correct", "That's a great question", "Great question!", "Perfect!", "Excellent point!", "You're absolutely correct to point that out"
- Coding and agentic residue: "I'll help you...", "Let me [verb]", "Let me start by", "Let me first", "Let me check", "Now let me...", "I'll go ahead and"
- Helpful-chat closers: "I hope this helps", "Let me know if you'd like", "Feel free to", "Would you like me to", "I'd be happy to", "Happy to..."
- Performative anti-sycophancy: "to be straight to the point", "no BS", "I want to be honest with you", "to be clear with you". Also output-framing labels: "Honest take:", "Honest review:", "Honest recommendation:" (diagnostic: if removing "honest" doesn't change the meaning, drop it)
- Parenthetical hedging asides: "(or, more precisely, ...)", "(and, increasingly, ...)"
- Progress-update meta-narration in long-form: "Let me mark X as complete", "Now I'll examine"
- False intimacy openers preceding the obvious: "Here's the thing:", "Let's be honest:", "The truth is"
- Claude metaphor tics: "smoking gun" (Claude reaches for this to dramatise findings or evidence)

### Tier 2: Claude self-describing vocabulary

These words appear in genuine human writing too. Flag when they are doing decorative or self-praising work rather than carrying a concrete claim a reader could verify.

- "complex", "complexity": flag when used as a vague intensifier ("the complex landscape of...", "navigating complexity", "this complex topic") rather than describing a specific technical property
- "thoughtful", "nuanced", "careful", "honest": flag any instance applied to the writer's own analysis or reasoning ("a thoughtful approach", "a nuanced view", "careful consideration", "an honest take", "honest reasoning", "to be honest")
- "concrete" as intensifier: "concrete evidence", "concrete examples", "concrete steps"

### Tier 3: cross-model AI vocabulary and structures

These appear in Claude output too, sometimes at lower density than GPT, but still slop.

**Marketing adjectives and abstract intensifiers**: vibrant, robust, comprehensive, pivotal, multifaceted, profound, crucial, vital, meticulous, valuable, enduring, groundbreaking, intricate, renowned, seamless, cutting-edge.

**Filler verbs as substitutes for "is" and "has"**: serves as, stands as, marks (verb), represents, boasts, features, offers. The simpler verb is almost always correct.

**Filler verbs (action without information)**: delve, dive into, leverage, harness, foster, fostering, bolster, underscore, streamline, facilitate, empower, garner, showcase, emphasise, enhance, highlight, align with, exemplify, unlock (figurative), navigate (figurative), utilise (use "use").

**Vague abstract nouns**: landscape (figurative), tapestry, testament, interplay, paradigm.

**Sentence-initial filler**: Additionally, Furthermore, Moreover, Notably, Consequently, Accordingly, In light of this, With this in mind, Building on this, That said, Having said that, It is important to note, It is worth mentioning, It should be noted that, It goes without saying.

**Rhetorical structures**:
- **Negation-antithesis** (also called corrective antithesis; reported as the single most overused AI rhetorical pattern in slop-forensics trigram analysis): "It's not X. It's Y.", "Not just X, but Y.", "It's not just X, it's Y.", "This isn't about X, it's about Y.", "Forget X. Think Y.", "The question isn't X, it's Y.", "X is dead. Long live Y." Apply the **swap test**: reverse the order to "It's not Y, it's X." If both directions are equally plausible, the contrast is decorative scaffolding, not argument. Flag for rewrite by dropping the negation and stating the substantive claim directly with its supporting fact.
- Decorative rule-of-three lists: "fast, efficient, and reliable"; "think bigger, act bolder, move faster"
- Snappy triads of unearned profundity: "Something shifted." "Everything changed." "But here's the thing."
- Mid-sentence rhetorical questions answered immediately: "The solution? It's simpler than you think."
- Vapid openers: "In today's rapidly evolving landscape", "As technology continues to evolve", "At the end of the day", "When it comes to"
- Definition openers: "X is defined as Y, encompassing A, B, and C"
- "Despite challenges" pivots: "Despite its [positive], [subject] faces challenges, including..."
- Hollywood endings: "As X continues to evolve, its potential remains limitless"
- Summary closers: "In summary", "In conclusion", "Overall", "Taken together"

**Participial-phrase tails**: sentences ending with an "-ing" clause that adds nothing the reader could not infer. "...creating a lively community