Skip to content

Add patterns 30-31, expand rules 9 and 14 (v2.6.0) #85

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
shoal-rat wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add patterns 30-31, expand rules 9 and 14 (v2.6.0) #85

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 6 additions & 3 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ The skill also includes a final "obviously AI generated" audit pass and a second

> "LLMs use statistical algorithms to guess what should come next. The result tends toward the most statistically likely result that applies to the widest variety of cases."

## 29 Patterns Detected (with Before/After Examples)
## 31 Patterns Detected (with Before/After Examples)

### Content Patterns

Expand All @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ The skill also includes a final "obviously AI generated" audit pass and a second
|---|---------|--------|-------|
| 7 | **AI vocabulary** | "Actually... additionally... testament... landscape... showcasing" | "also... remain common" |
| 8 | **Copula avoidance** | "serves as... features... boasts" | "is... has" |
| 9 | **Negative parallelisms / tailing negations** | "It's not just X, it's Y", "..., no guessing" | State the point directly |
| 9 | **Negative parallelisms / tailing negations / "rather than" dismissals** | "It's not just X, it's Y", "..., no guessing", "X rather than Y (where Y is unstated)" | State the point directly; cut dismissed alternatives nobody claimed |
| 10 | **Rule of three** | "innovation, inspiration, and insights" | Use natural number of items |
| 11 | **Synonym cycling** | "protagonist... main character... central figure... hero" | "protagonist" (repeat when clearest) |
| 12 | **False ranges** | "from the Big Bang to dark matter" | List topics directly |
Expand All @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ The skill also includes a final "obviously AI generated" audit pass and a second

| # | Pattern | Before | After |
|---|---------|--------|-------|
| 14 | **Em dash overuse** | "institutions—not the people—yet this continues—" | Prefer commas or periods |
| 14 | **Em dash overuse / paired bracketing** | "institutions—not the people—yet this continues—", "report—covering three continents—concluded" | Prefer commas or periods; break paired brackets into separate sentences or appositives |
| 15 | **Boldface overuse** | "**OKRs**, **KPIs**, **BMC**" | "OKRs, KPIs, BMC" |
| 16 | **Inline-header lists** | "**Performance:** Performance improved" | Convert to prose |
| 17 | **Title Case Headings** | "Strategic Negotiations And Partnerships" | "Strategic negotiations and partnerships" |
Expand All @@ -127,6 +127,8 @@ The skill also includes a final "obviously AI generated" audit pass and a second
| 27 | **Persuasive authority tropes** | "At its core, what matters is..." | State the point directly |
| 28 | **Signposting announcements** | "Let's dive in", "Here's what you need to know" | Start with the content |
| 29 | **Fragmented headers** | "## Performance" + "Speed matters." | Let the heading do the work |
| 30 | **Conditional frame stacking** | "If the argument holds, and if the reading is right, then perhaps..." | State the conclusion; reserve "if" for real analytical branches |
| 31 | **Miscalibrated epistemic confidence** | Over: "decisively demonstrates fundamentally"; Over-hedge: "appears to have arguably may have somewhat" | Narrow the claim to what the evidence supports; don't replace over-assertion with hedges |

### Communication Patterns

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -179,6 +181,7 @@ The skill also includes a final "obviously AI generated" audit pass and a second

## Version History

- **2.6.0** - Added patterns 30 (conditional frame stacking) and 31 (miscalibrated epistemic confidence); expanded rule 9 to cover "rather than" dismissals; expanded rule 14 to cover paired em dash bracketing; raising the total to 31 patterns
- **2.5.1** - Added a passive-voice / subjectless-fragment rule, raising the total to 29 patterns
- **2.5.0** - Added patterns for persuasive framing, signposting, and fragmented headers; expanded negative parallelisms to cover tailing negations; tightened wording around em dash overuse; fixed frontmatter wording to use "filler phrases"
- **2.4.0** - Added voice calibration: match the user's personal writing style from samples
Expand Down
69 changes: 64 additions & 5 deletions SKILL.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,13 +1,14 @@
---
name: humanizer
version: 2.5.1
version: 2.6.0
description: |
Remove signs of AI-generated writing from text. Use when editing or reviewing
text to make it sound more natural and human-written. Based on Wikipedia's
comprehensive "Signs of AI writing" guide. Detects and fixes patterns including:
inflated symbolism, promotional language, superficial -ing analyses, vague
attributions, em dash overuse, rule of three, AI vocabulary words, passive
voice, negative parallelisms, and filler phrases.
voice, negative parallelisms, filler phrases, conditional frame stacking, and
miscalibrated epistemic confidence.
license: MIT
compatibility: claude-code opencode
allowed-tools:
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -197,9 +198,9 @@ Avoiding AI patterns is only half the job. Sterile, voiceless writing is just as
> Gallery 825 is LAAA's exhibition space for contemporary art. The gallery has four rooms totaling 3,000 square feet.


### 9. Negative Parallelisms and Tailing Negations
### 9. Negative Parallelisms, Tailing Negations, and "Rather Than" Dismissals

**Problem:** Constructions like "Not only...but..." or "It's not just about..., it's..." are overused. So are clipped tailing-negation fragments such as "no guessing" or "no wasted motion" tacked onto the end of a sentence instead of written as a real clause.
**Problem:** Constructions like "Not only...but..." or "It's not just about..., it's..." are overused. So are clipped tailing-negation fragments such as "no guessing" or "no wasted motion" tacked onto the end of a sentence instead of written as a real clause. A third form of the same pattern is "rather than" used to stage a contrast by dismissing an alternative that nobody was claiming in the first place.

**Before:**
> It's not just about the beat riding under the vocals; it's part of the aggression and atmosphere. It's not merely a song, it's a statement.
Expand All @@ -213,6 +214,14 @@ Avoiding AI patterns is only half the job. Sterile, voiceless writing is just as
**After:**
> The options come from the selected item without forcing the user to guess.

**Before ("rather than" dismissal):**
> The goal is to write clearly rather than to impress the reader with complexity.

**After:**
> The goal is to write clearly.

**Test:** Ask whether the discarded alternative (Y in "X rather than Y") is actually on the table. If no one was claiming Y, cut the dismissal and just say X.


### 10. Rule of Three Overuse

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -260,16 +269,29 @@ Avoiding AI patterns is only half the job. Sterile, voiceless writing is just as

## STYLE PATTERNS

### 14. Em Dash Overuse
### 14. Em Dash Overuse and Paired Bracketing

**Problem:** LLMs use em dashes (—) more than humans, mimicking "punchy" sales writing. In practice, most of these can be rewritten more cleanly with commas, periods, or parentheses.

A specific sub-pattern is paired em dash bracketing: wrapping an elaboration between two dashes (X — elaboration — continues). This looks inserted rather than written — like something dropped into an existing sentence rather than composed as part of it.

**Before:**
> The term is primarily promoted by Dutch institutions—not by the people themselves. You don't say "Netherlands, Europe" as an address—yet this mislabeling continues—even in official documents.

**After:**
> The term is primarily promoted by Dutch institutions, not by the people themselves. You don't say "Netherlands, Europe" as an address, yet this mislabeling continues in official documents.

**Before (paired bracketing):**
> The report—which covered three continents and twelve case studies—concluded that demand had shifted.

**After options (depending on type of insertion):**
- If a list: break into a separate sentence. "The report covered three continents and twelve case studies. It concluded that demand had shifted."
- If an appositive: use a comma or recast. "The report, covering three continents and twelve case studies, concluded that demand had shifted."
- If a parenthetical aside: use parentheses if truly aside, or restructure. "The report (three continents, twelve case studies) concluded that demand had shifted."
- If subject expansion: rewrite as two sentences.

**Exception:** A single, short, earned bracket that does not repeat elsewhere in the passage is fine. The problem is the pattern, not any one instance.


### 15. Overuse of Boldface

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -461,6 +483,43 @@ Avoiding AI patterns is only half the job. Sterile, voiceless writing is just as
>
> When users hit a slow page, they leave.


### 30. Conditional Frame Stacking

**Problem:** AI hedges its own conclusions by stacking multiple "if" clauses in the same passage — "if the argument holds," "if the reading is right," "if this interpretation is correct." One conditional at a genuine analytical branching point is fine. A cluster of them in a conclusion or summary signals the writer is not standing behind their own work.

**Before:**
> If the argument holds, and if the evidence supports this reading, then the policy may have had some effect — if, that is, the context was as described.

**After:**
> The evidence supports the argument that the policy had an effect in this context.

**Fix:** In a conclusion or summary, state what the argument found. Reserve "if" for real analytical branches where the outcome genuinely differs depending on the condition — not as a repeated hedge against being wrong.


### 31. Miscalibrated Epistemic Confidence

**Problem:** A two-sided pattern. AI swings between over-asserting and over-hedging, sometimes in the same passage.

- **Over-assertion:** Loading claims with words like "decisively," "fundamentally," "completely," "unquestionably," "clearly demonstrates" when the evidence is more limited.
- **Over-hedging:** Layering qualifiers such as "appears to have arguably," "may have somewhat," "could potentially suggest" when the evidence actually supports a more direct statement.

Both are tells. The fix is not to replace one extreme with the other — it is to narrow the claim to what the evidence actually supports.

**Before (over-assertion):**
> The data decisively demonstrates that remote work fundamentally transformed productivity across all sectors.

**After:**
> In the surveyed companies, productivity rose an average of 8% in the first year of remote work.

**Before (over-hedging):**
> It appears that the policy may have arguably had some effect on outcomes, potentially suggesting a modest shift.

**After:**
> The policy was associated with a modest improvement in outcomes in two of the three cases studied.

**Critical rule:** Do not fix over-assertion by adding hedges. Fix it by narrowing the claim.

---

## Process
Expand Down