chinese-ai-writing-polish

Traditional Chinese AI phrase watchdog Writing Skill

This is a portable writing skill: it can be used independently, or loaded by openpress-create-pages When the output language is professional content in Traditional Chinese, this skill provides judgment rules for sentence patterns, word choice, table text, passive voice, and reversed sentences.

Relationship with other Skills

• In open-press page-based documents, it is loaded by openpress-create-pages for Traditional Chinese content.
• If other project-specific portable writing skills are loaded at the same time, conflict resolution follows the priority order within openpress-create-pages .
• This skill does not govern open-press source paths, CLI, validation, output, deployment, or the starter application process; system operations always go back to openpress for routing, which then decides whether to hand off to other openpress-* skills.

Objective

Produce professional, usable, deliverable Chinese content. Prioritize preserving facts, judgments, targets, actions, and results; avoid filling content with AI-style sentence patterns that look polished but carry little information.

Core principles

• State claims directly; do not package weak arguments in dramatic turns.
• Replace abstract slogans with specific nouns, verbs, scenarios, and results.
• Each paragraph should carry only one key point: the target, problem, approach, and effect must be clear.
• If it can be quantified, quantify it; if it cannot, explain the basis for the observation clearly.
• Avoid overpromising. Without evidence, do not write "best," "disruptive," "redefines," or "revolutionary."
• Write for the decision the reader needs to make, not for the text to look good.
• Use reversed phrasing only as a small hook; ordinary paragraphs should directly state what the product does so readers grasp the point in the first second.
• Table text should look like a table, not a paragraph. When column names already convey the meaning, cells should avoid repeating incidental verbs such as "validated," "supports," "completed," or "used for," and should prioritize nouns, data, status, and results.
• Avoid repeatedly mentioning the same subject within the same subsection. If the product, company, or founder has already been established at the start of a paragraph, later sentences may use "product," "platform," "team," or "this plan" to carry forward, or omit the subject when the meaning is clear.

High-risk AI-style sentence patterns

Patterns to avoid	Problem	Rewrite direction
This is not A, but B	Uses contrast to create depth, but often adds no new information; if used too often, readers cannot grasp the point in the first second	Directly state B's specific function, value, or difference; only use as a hook when contrasting with a very different system
Not only A, but also B	Structure is clichéd and easily stacks two vague nouns together	Break it into "what it can currently do" and "what result this brings"
Turn every instance of A into B	Overly visionary and lacks an execution mechanism	Explain what the system or process actually records, determines, reminds, or produces each time A occurs
Make X no longer just Y	Strong sense of turn but low information density	Directly describe X's newly added capability or use case
From A to B, fully upgraded	Scope is too broad and lacks verifiable details	List the upgraded items, the changes users feel, and the constraints
Redefine A	Overstated claims that usually cannot be proven	Change to “improve a specific part of A”
Build an A with warmth	Abstract and common, hard to implement	State which interaction, feedback, or service makes users feel the difference
Empower, bestow, open a new chapter	Business jargon that easily sounds vague	Change to “support,” “assist,” “provide,” “reduce,” “shorten,” “improve”
In this era of rapid change	The opening is vague and weakly connected to the topic	Go directly into the specific problem readers face
The real A is not B, but C	Sounds like a speech sound bite, not a professional explanation	Change to a testable judgment or standard
Every A deserves to be B	Emotional and generic	Point out which A need B, and why
Through A, make B more C	Overreliance on “through” and “make” to string sentences together	Change to an action sentence with a clear subject: “A organizes B and marks C”
Make X able to / capable of being Y	Wrapped in passive voice, the subject and responsibility are unclear, easily producing vague sentences like “make data usable” or “make problems visible”	Change to an active sentence with a clear subject: “The system organizes X for Y to use” or “Teachers can use X to judge Y”
X can be / is capable of being Y	Overuse of passive voice makes it hard for readers to tell who performs the action and what result is produced	Change to “who uses X to do what” or “how the system processes X”

Rewriting method

1. Identify the sentence’s actual meaning: is it trying to say function, difference, vision, outcome, or emotion?
2. Delete the formulaic skeleton: remove “not... but...”, “not only... but also...”, and “turn every... into...”.
3. Add specific information: who, in what situation, did what, and got what result.
4. Check the strength of evidence: if there is no supporting data, soften the tone and change it to “helps,” “can assist,” or “the goal is.”
5. Condense with short sentences: put only one main judgment in a sentence, and avoid stacking abstract nouns in succession.

Subject continuity rule

Chinese business documents do not need to repeat the product name or company name in every sentence. When a subsection heading, the first sentence of a paragraph, or the previous sentence has already established the subject, subsequent sentences should naturally carry it forward.

Avoid	Problem	Suggested wording
QJudge 目前是一人公司……因此 QJudge 現階段雖然以一人公司形態推進……	If the same information is repeated twice, readers will feel the paragraph is going in circles	The first paragraph explains the current situation, and the later paragraph is rewritten as “Although the team is small at this stage, the product is not developed in isolation.”
QJudge 的組織化不會……QJudge 會……QJudge 需要……	The product name is repeated too much, making the tone stiff	組織化不會……後續會……下一階段需要……
本產品支援……本產品提供……本產品能夠……	Every sentence restarts the subject, making the paragraph rhythm clunky	Keep the product name in the first instance, then use “system,” “platform,” “feature,” or directly connect to the action

Judgment criteria:

• If the same product name appears more than 2 times in the same paragraph, first check whether it can be omitted or replaced.
• If the previous sentence has already clearly stated the subject, do not start the next sentence with the same noun again.
• Subject replacement should serve clarity, not use vague substitutes for the sake of variation; keep the full subject only when readers would otherwise misunderstand.
• The concluding sentence may return to the product name, but it should not repeat a state or background already stated earlier.

Table text rules

The column names in a table already provide context, so cells should reduce full sentences and repeated verbs, allowing readers to scan quickly.

Avoid	Problem	Suggested wording
Scale:60 人受測	The column already says "Scale,"受測 redundant	60 人
Verified capabilities:驗證程式上機等特殊題型也能在線上完成作答與監考	The column already says "Verified capabilities"; writing "verified" again at the beginning is repetitive	程式上機等特殊題型可在線上完成作答與監考
Platform development status:已支援正式課程建立考試	The status column already has "Launched"; writing "supported" again in the notes is redundant	正式課程考試建立；多題型作答介面
Notes:可用於考前到場簽到、身分確認與考生狀態整理	可用於 adds no information	考前到場簽到、身分確認與考生狀態整理

Criteria:

• When the column is called "Scale," put only numbers and units in the cell.
• When the column is called "Status," put only the status in the cell, and do not add "currently" or "already."
• When the column is called "Capabilities," "Features," or "Notes," use noun phrases or short sentences in the cell, not full explanatory paragraphs.
• If the same row needs to add causes or constraints, move them to the paragraphs before or after the table instead of cramming them into the cell.

Boundaries for using reverse constructions

Reverse constructions such as "not A, but B" and "not only A, but also B" should not be used as the opening of a regular explanatory paragraph. They first require readers to understand a negated object, then wait for the actual claim to appear, which makes it easy for reviewers or readers to miss the point in the first second.

Usable contexts:

• Comparing systems with major differences: for example, when it is necessary to explain the fundamental differences between QJudge and LMS, Google Forms, general question banks, or OJ platforms.
• Paragraph hook: use one sentence to open the contrast, but the next sentence must immediately follow with specific differences, such as features, workflow, data, responsibility boundaries, or user behavior.
• Avoid using it consecutively: if a reverse construction has already been used once in the same chapter, subsequent paragraphs should switch to positive statements.

Contexts not recommended:

• When explaining product features: directly write what the system requires users to do, what the system records, and what results it produces.
• When explaining the vision: directly write the question types, data flows, or assessment methods to be supported in the future, and do not package them in slogans.
• When explaining value: directly write how much manpower is reduced, which process is shortened, and which records are retained.

Criterion: if deleting "not A" still allows the sentence to directly explain B's function or value, the reverse opening should be deleted.

Rewrite examples

Example 1: Product positioning

Avoid:

This is not a problem-solving platform, but a learning companion that accompanies students as they continue to grow.

Suggested:

QJudge records students' submission history, error types, and revision process, allowing students to review their own sticking points and teachers to understand common problems in the class.

Example 2: Learning process

Avoid:

Turn every practice session into an opportunity for growth.

Suggested:

After each practice session, the system retains the question, submission result, error messages, and revision history, making it easy for students to compare earlier and later versions and organize their weak points.

Example 3: Business Proposal

Avoid:

We do more than provide tools; we help redefine programming learning in educational settings.

Suggested:

We provide automatic grading, assignment distribution, learning records, and class analysis, helping teachers reduce grading time and identify students' common errors earlier.

Example 4: Website Copy

Avoid:

In an era of rapid AI development, create a smarter and warmer learning experience.

Suggested:

After students submit their code, the system immediately returns test case results and error prompts; teachers can view completion rates, error distribution, and individual progress in the backend.

Usable Sentence Patterns

• X 是給 [使用者] 在 [情境] 中完成 [任務] 的 [產品類型]。
• [功能] 會在 [觸發時機] 自動 [動作]，供 [使用者] [具體行動]。
• 相較於 [既有做法]，[方案] 減少了 [成本或阻力]，並保留 [必要能力]。
• 這項設計解決的是 [具體問題]，不是泛稱的 [抽象願景]。
• 目前版本支援 [能力 A]、[能力 B]、[能力 C]；尚未涵蓋 [限制]。
• 若目標是 [決策或成果]，建議優先呈現 [證據或指標]。

Word Choice Preferences

• Prioritize: support, assist, provide, record, organize, compare, mark, remind, reduce, shorten, improve, track, review.
• Use with caution: create, empower, disrupt, innovate, redefine, all-around, immersive, seamless, unprecedented, warm.
• Avoid using abstract nouns consecutively: experience, value, vision, scenario, ecosystem, solution, influence.
• Professional content should use Traditional Chinese and Taiwan's common language sense; avoid unnecessary Simplified Chinese terms and translationese.

Handling English Technical Terms

Do not force-translate English technical terms just for the sake of being "all Chinese." Criteria:

Context	Handling Method
English terms already widespread in the industry and immediately understood by readers	Keep the English directly, for example edge case、spec、rubric、pipeline、SOP、KPI、API、OAuth
A more precise Chinese expression exists that does not cause misunderstanding	Use Chinese, for example "discrimination" "procurement cycle" "exam invigilation process"
Literal translation is obscure or inaccurate	Use English, or rewrite the contextual description (e.g.,edge case do not force-translate as "corner case"; you may write "exceptional events in teaching settings" or "special situations you would not normally think of")
The English original term has already appeared earlier in the same document	Continue using English afterward; do not mix two translated names

When judging, prioritize "readers grasp the meaning in the first second" and "precision," not "the Chinese-English ratio." Professional readers (judges, industry) usually recognize common English terms better than awkward literal translations.

Pre-delivery Check

• Does "This is not... but..." "not only... but also..." "turn every... into..." or their variants appear?
• Do passive packaging sentences such as "let X be able to / can be Y" "X can be / can be Y" "data is used" appear?
• If a reverse statement is used, is it to contrast with a very different system? Does the next sentence immediately follow with a concrete difference?
• Does each paragraph have at least one clear subject and one concrete action?
• Can the adjectives be supported by evidence? If not, delete or downgrade them.
• Are slogans replaced with functions, processes, data, and limitations?
• After reading, do readers know what they can judge, do, or believe next?

Usage Rules

When outputting Chinese content, first scan the draft with this Skill. If the draft contains high-risk AI-style sentence patterns, it must be rewritten into a concrete, verifiable, deliverable version; unless the user explicitly requests to retain a promotional, speech-like, or highly rhetorical tone.