SuperAPI AI Directory
Partner中文AI newsFavorites
Skillssynthesis-writing-pitfalls

synthesis-writing-pitfalls

Writing & research

View repository

Updated 10-22 17:15

About this skill

Writing Pitfalls

Universal bad-writing patterns that human authors and editors fall into, independent of AI. This skill is the human-source counterpart to synthesis-content-quality (which catches AI-generation patterns) and the negative complement to synthesis-writing-craft (which carries positive principles).

Binding rules

  1. Identify a pattern by its function, not its surface form. The same words can be a pitfall in one venue and right in another, so calibrate by venue, audience and intent.
  2. The fix is some version of: trust the reader, drop the defense, state the substance plainly.
  3. Every edit names the defect it repairs (pattern 23). Keep a strong sentence when a change has no demonstrable gain.
  4. Prose cues do not establish authorship. Classify the pattern, explain its effect and revise; never turn a style cue into a claim that a human or a model wrote it.
  5. Keep the two root causes apart. Human-source patterns are fixed here; AI-generation patterns go to synthesis-content-quality. Merging them obscures both fixes.
  6. One high-confidence indicator means a craft failure whoever wrote it; three or more medium ones warrant revision, five or more substantial revision.
  7. Read the families, not just the hits: a cluster names the underlying problem more clearly than any single indicator.

Contents

  • references/catalog.md: the full text of patterns 1 to 23 with their fixes, and the quick-reference checklist (phrases to grep for, cringe patterns beyond phrases, structural checks). Read it when scanning or editing.
  • references/detailed-pitfalls.md: examples, why each pattern fails, fixes and edge cases for all 23. Read it when a case is unclear or when teaching.
  • references/background.md: why this is a separate skill, the core philosophy, how it differs from AI-pattern detection, related skills. Read it when choosing between this skill and its siblings.
  • references/coverage-map.md: where each part of the 1.1.0 text now lives.
  • When to use, Pattern index, Detection process: below.

When to Use This Skill

  • Reviewing or editing prose for craft failures
  • Auditing an existing archive of writing
  • Self-editing a draft before publication
  • Training writers or editors
  • Performing editorial review when AI involvement is unlikely or irrelevant
  • Running a comprehensive scan over older or pre-AI content

Pattern index

Each pattern is tagged with its confidence tier: [HIGH] (almost always a pitfall), [MED] (often a pitfall but context-dependent), or [LOW] (a pitfall only in certain registers). Numbers match the catalog and the detailed reference.

Cringe family:

  1. Humble-bragging [HIGH]
  2. Credential-stuffing [HIGH]
  3. Pre-emptive originality defense [HIGH]
  4. Third-person self-reference in personal writing [HIGH]
  5. Apologizing-while-bragging [MED]
  6. Reverse humble-brag [MED]

Throat-clearing:

  1. Meta-narration [HIGH]
  2. Long preambles before the actual point [MED]
  3. "Before I begin..." openings [HIGH]
  4. Setup-without-payoff [MED]

Caveat overload:

  1. More hedges than claims [HIGH]
  2. Defensive parenthetical clusters [MED]
  3. "Of course there are exceptions" without naming any [MED]

Reader-relationship missteps:

  1. Reader-flattering postures [HIGH]
  2. Reader-condescending postures [HIGH]
  3. "As we all know" and variants [HIGH]

Sentence-level weakness:

  1. Empty intensifiers [MED]
  2. Passive-voice misuse [MED]
  3. Buried lede [HIGH]
  4. Weak openings [MED]

Cliché reliance and dead metaphors:

  1. Cliché as substitute for thought [MED]

Stilted formality:

  1. Register mismatch [MED]
  2. Unnecessary editorial intervention [HIGH]

Detection Process

Step 1: Scan for High-Confidence Indicators

Check for: pre-emptive originality defenses, third-person self-reference in personal writing, "Before I begin," "As we all know," reader-flattering or reader-condescending postures, buried ledes.

If any are present, the prose almost certainly has a craft failure regardless of who wrote it.

Step 2: Count Medium-Confidence Indicators

  • 3 or more present: revision warranted
  • 5 or more present: substantial revision warranted

Step 3: Assess by Family

  • Multiple cringe-family patterns: the writer is performing credibility instead of demonstrating it
  • Multiple throat-clearing patterns: the writer has not yet figured out what they are saying
  • Multiple caveat-overload patterns: the writer does not believe their own claims
  • Multiple reader-relationship missteps: the writer has not figured out who the reader is

The family pattern often points to the underlying problem more clearly than any single indicator.

Step 4: Calibrate by Venue

A pattern that is a clear pitfall in a personal blog post may be neutral or appropriate in a legal brief, an academic paper, or a corporate memo. Apply the catalog with judgment about register.

Part of the synthesis writing craft — the writer writes, the AI assists.