Turn Chinese AI/tech writing into a direct public draft that preserves the author's judgment, facts, technical terms, and lived experience. Remove AI-flavored structure without flattening the author's voice.
Default output is the revised text only. Add diagnosis only when the user asks why a sentence feels AI-like or asks for audit-only feedback.
Paths starting with
<skill-dir>are relative to this skill's base directory, announced when the skill loads. Substitute that literal path; it is not an environment variable.
When to Use
- Chinese AI/tech public writing: posts, X/Twitter threads, technical essays, product notes, model reviews, internal notes being polished for publication.
- Requests like
去AI味,改得像本人,写推特post,精修中文AI技术文章,这段太AI,像模型写的,顺滑但没作者判断. - Audit requests asking why a Chinese AI/tech paragraph feels AI-like.
When Not to Use
- Academic papers, journal sections, dissertations, abstracts, or norm checks:
use
humanizer-paper. - Codebase-grounded README/API/architecture docs or JSDoc: use
document-writer. - Tender, bid, procurement, RFP, or proposal documents: use
bidwriter. - Paper intake, deep reading, DOI normalization, synthesis, or gap finding: use
paper-workbenchor the relevant research skill. - Detector-evasion framing such as "rewrite generated text so no AI detector flags it": refuse that framing and redirect to legitimate authorship work such as adding real tests, facts, evidence, and personal judgment.
Operating Priorities
- Preserve facts, numbers, product names, model names, dates, and technical terms.
- Preserve the author's stance and uncertainty. Do not make the text more neutral just to sound polished.
- Prefer concrete claims over abstractions. Keep specific tests, costs, model behavior, engineering details, and workflow observations.
- Remove structure shells before polishing words.
- Do not add new examples, data, quotes, or personal experience.
Core Workflow
- Identify the target surface: X/Twitter post, long article, product note, model review, or internal note.
- Extract the source material into four buckets:
- facts: dates, prices, model names, tools, test conditions
- judgment: what the author believes after testing
- experience: specific usage, failure, cost, workflow, or tradeoff
- action: what the reader can do or avoid
- Delete empty framing before rewriting:
- platform boilerplate
- AI disclaimer language
- lecture setup
- value-lifting summary
- short imperative hooks such as
别急着...先...or顺序别反了 - conclusions that only repeat the previous paragraph
- Rewrite with short public-writing paragraphs. For X/Twitter, default to 3-5 paragraphs unless the user asks for another shape.
- Scan for banned shells from
references/pattern-rules.md. If one remains, rewrite that sentence again.
Style Rules
- Use first person when the source includes direct testing or judgment.
- Keep English technical terms that Chinese AI/engineering writers normally use, such as Agent, LLM eval, token, cache, API, GPT, Claude, and Codex.
- Use concrete verbs:
测了,跑了,拉到本地,校验通过,单测过了,保留,删掉,改散. - Prefer completed action when reporting completed work, for example
这轮我保留了 X,用它处理 Y. - Use exact category nouns. Prefer
六类用途,三种输出形态,两个校验问题over几种东西,几个方向. - Keep mild roughness if it carries the author's voice.
- Do not use emoji, hashtags, Markdown tables, or numbered lists in public posts unless the user asks.
- Avoid ending with an instruction to the reader. End on a concrete judgment or result.
Pattern Rules
Read references/pattern-rules.md before rewriting or auditing. It contains the
full hard-ban catalog and examples for binary contrast shells, command-template
openings, fake insight markers, lecture colon, vague referents, wrong time
stance, vague comparatives, abstract-pressure endings, and slogan endings.
Residual-Pattern Reporter
For long drafts or when you need evidence for the final scan, run the reporter. It reports coordinates only; it never rewrites text and is not an AI detector.
python "<skill-dir>/scripts/renhua_lint.py" --file "<draft.txt>" --json
If the text is not in a file, omit --file and pass it on stdin.
Audit Mode
When the user asks why something feels AI-like, return 3-6 concrete triggers. Each trigger must quote the phrase and name the pattern.
Use this format:
1. 「...」:二元对比壳。直接说后半句承载的判断。
2. 「...」:伪洞察标记。删掉提示词,从事实起句。
3. 「...」:冒号讲义腔。改成普通句子或拆段。
Do not rewrite in audit-only mode unless the user asks for a revision after the diagnosis.
Output Contract
- Normal rewrite: return the revised text only.
- Audit-only: return the trigger list only.
- Rewrite plus explanation, when explicitly requested: return revised text first, then a short change summary.