Detects and fixes AI writing patterns ("AI-isms") that make text sound machine-generated. Covers 21 pattern categories with examples of plainer alternatives. The full upstream pattern catalog is not bundled in this AAS entrypoint; do not claim a complete 43-entry table is present.
When to Use This Skill
- When asked to "remove AI-isms," "clean up AI writing," or "make this sound less like AI"
- After drafting content with AI and before publishing
- When editing any text that sounds like it was generated rather than written
- When auditing documentation, blog posts, marketing copy, or internal communications for AI tells
What It Detects
21 pattern categories: formatting issues (em dashes, bold overuse, emoji headers, bullet-heavy sections), sentence structure problems (hedging, hollow intensifiers, rule of three), word/phrase replacements (43 entries like leverage→use, utilize→use, robust→reliable), template phrases, transition phrases, structural issues, significance inflation, copula avoidance, synonym cycling, vague attributions, filler phrases, generic conclusions, chatbot artifacts, notability name-dropping, superficial -ing analyses, promotional language, formulaic challenges, false ranges, inline-header lists, title case headings, and cutoff disclaimers.
Example
Prompt:
Audit this for AI writing patterns:
"In today's rapidly evolving AI landscape, developers are embarking on a pivotal journey to leverage cutting-edge tools that streamline their workflows. Moreover, these robust solutions serve as a testament to the industry's commitment to fostering seamless experiences."
Output: The skill returns four sections:
- Issues found — every AI-ism quoted (landscape, embarking, pivotal, leverage, cutting-edge, streamline, robust, serves as, testament to, fostering, seamless, Moreover, In today's rapidly evolving...)
- Rewritten version — "Developers are starting to use newer AI tools to simplify their work. These tools are reliable, and they're making development less painful."
- What changed — summary of edits
- Second-pass audit — re-reads the rewrite to catch any surviving tells
Limitations
-
These are editorial heuristics, not proof of AI authorship. Preserve factual claims, uncertainty, attributed quotations, code, identifiers, and the requested scope.
-
For audit-only requests, report findings without rewriting. Avoid replacing a precise technical term merely because it appears on a word list.
-
Does not detect AI-generated code, only prose
-
Pattern matching is guideline-based, not absolute — some flagged words are fine in context
-
The replacement table suggests alternatives but the best choice depends on context
-
Cannot verify factual claims or find real citations to replace vague attributions