本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

stop-slop

Remove AI writing patterns from prose. Use when drafting, editing, or reviewing text to eliminate predictable AI tells.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(7)

  • SKILL.md2.6 KB
  • CHANGELOG.md895 B
  • LICENSE1.0 KB
  • README-original.md1.8 KB
  • references/examples.md1.6 KB
  • references/phrases.md2.8 KB
  • references/structures.md5.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Stop Slop

Eliminate predictable AI writing patterns from prose.

Core Rules

  1. Cut filler phrases. Remove throat-clearing openers, emphasis crutches, and all adverbs. See references/phrases.md.

  2. Break formulaic structures. Avoid binary contrasts, negative listings, dramatic fragmentation, rhetorical setups, false agency. See references/structures.md.

  3. Use active voice. Every sentence needs a human subject doing something. No passive constructions. No inanimate objects performing human actions ("the complaint becomes a fix").

  4. Be specific. No vague declaratives ("The reasons are structural"). Name the specific thing. No lazy extremes ("every," "always," "never") doing vague work.

  5. Put the reader in the room. No narrator-from-a-distance voice. "You" beats "People." Specifics beat abstractions.

  6. Vary rhythm. Mix sentence lengths. Two items beat three. End paragraphs differently. No em dashes.

  7. Trust readers. State facts directly. Skip softening, justification, hand-holding.

  8. Cut quotables. If it sounds like a pull-quote, rewrite it.

Quick Checks

Before delivering prose:

  • Any adverbs? Kill them.
  • Any passive voice? Find the actor, make them the subject.
  • Inanimate thing doing a human verb ("the decision emerges")? Name the person.
  • Sentence starts with a Wh- word? Restructure it.
  • Any "here's what/this/that" throat-clearing? Cut to the point.
  • Any "not X, it's Y" contrasts? State Y directly.
  • Three consecutive sentences match length? Break one.
  • Paragraph ends with punchy one-liner? Vary it.
  • Em-dash anywhere? Remove it.
  • Vague declarative ("The implications are significant")? Name the specific implication.
  • Narrator-from-a-distance ("Nobody designed this")? Put the reader in the scene.
  • Meta-joiners ("The rest of this essay...")? Delete. Let the essay move.

Scoring

Rate 1-10 on each dimension:

DimensionQuestion
DirectnessStatements or announcements?
RhythmVaried or metronomic?
TrustRespects reader intelligence?
AuthenticitySounds human?
DensityAnything cuttable?

Below 35/50: revise.

Examples

See references/examples.md for before/after transformations.

License

MIT

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

a1

無料

VS-Enhanced Research Question Refiner - Prevents Mode Collapse and derives differentiated research questions Enhanced VS 3-Phase process: Modal question avoidance, alternatives presentation, differentiated RQ recommendation Use when: refining research ideas, formulating research questions, clarifying scope Triggers: research question, 연구 질문, PICO, SPIDER, research idea

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5982026年10月12日 更新

a2

無料

VS-Enhanced Theoretical Framework Architect with Critique & Visualization Full VS 5-Phase process: Modal theory avoidance, Long-tail exploration, differentiated framework presentation Absorbed A3 (Devil's Advocate) critique and A6 (Conceptual Framework Visualizer) capabilities Use when: building theoretical foundations, designing conceptual models, deriving hypotheses, critiquing frameworks, visualizing models Triggers: theoretical framework, 이론적 프레임워크, conceptual model, 개념적 모형, hypothesis derivation, critique, devil's advocate, 반론, visualization, diagram

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5982026年10月12日 更新

a5

無料

Agent A5 - Paradigm & Worldview Advisor - Philosophical foundations for research design. Covers ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology alignment. Use when: establishing philosophical foundations, justifying methodological choices, writing positionality statements Triggers: paradigm, 패러다임, ontology, epistemology, worldview, 세계관, philosophical foundations, 철학적 기초

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5982026年10月12日 更新

Academic paper writing skill with 12-agent pipeline. v2.5: Style Calibration (learn author's writing voice from past papers) + Writing Quality Check (writing quality checklist for natural prose). Supports IMRaD, literature review, theoretical, case study, policy brief, and conference paper structures. APA 7.0 (default), Chicago, MLA, IEEE, Vancouver citation formats. Bilingual abstracts (zh-TW + EN). Multi-format output (LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, Markdown). Triggers on: write paper, academic paper, paper outline, write abstract, revise paper, check citations, convert to LaTeX, guide my paper, parse reviews, revision roadmap, 寫論文, 學術論文, 論文大綱, 寫摘要, 修改論文, 檢查引用, 引導我寫論文, 帶我規劃論文, 逐章規劃, 論文架構, 審查意見, 修訂路線圖.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5982026年10月12日 更新

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5982026年10月12日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Simulates 5 independent reviewers (EIC + 3 peer reviewers + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, and Socratic guided modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4,5982026年10月12日 更新

brycewang-stanford のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する