humanize
Skill1 starsChanged 21 days agoMITView on GitHub
Cleans and scores any draft before a person posts, sends or publishes it, so it reads like the founder wrote it and not a chatbot. Strips hidden characters, long dashes, curly quotes and stock AI phrases, flags words the founder's business file says to avoid, and gives a 0 to 100 score that explains every lost point in plain words. Use it whenever someone says "humanize this", "make it sound less like AI", "does this sound like ChatGPT", "clean up my post", "remove the em dashes", "score my draft" or "check this before I send it", and run it on every LinkedIn post, Instagram caption, DM, cold email, landing page or investor update another skill writes, before showing the draft. Local pattern checks only, no detector service.
74 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflowtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- jmusick/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Nossie/humanizetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- droxey/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lalulali/vespyrtheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- angusfretwell/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use humanize-redo, humanize-korean and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
dawn840705Skillhumanize-redo
가장 최근 윤문 결과를 2차로 다시 다듬는다 — 특정 카테고리·문단·강도 조정도 가능. humanize-korean 의 윤문 콜을 기존 run_id 에 재실행해 잔존 finding 을 처리한다. 트리거 — "$humanize-redo". **명시적 슬래시 호출 전용** — 자연어 후속 요청은 `humanize-korean` 오케스트레이터가 받는다.
Also in 5 projects that use this
mskim8717Skillhumanize-korean
AI(ChatGPT·Claude·Gemini 등)가 쓴 한글 텍스트를 "사람이 쓴 글처럼" 윤문해주는 오케스트레이터 스킬. 번역투·영어 인용 과다·기계적 병렬·관용구·피동태 남용·접속사 남발·리듬 균일성·이모지/불릿 과다 등 10대 카테고리 40+ AI 티 패턴을 탐지·분류해 내용은 한 글자도 건드리지 않고 문체·리듬·표현만 자연스러운 한국어로 재작성한다. 트리거 — "AI 티 없애줘", "AI 같은 글 자연스럽게", "GPT/ChatGPT 문체", "AI 번역투 고쳐", "사람이 쓴 것처럼 윤문", "AI 윤문", "ChatGPT 티 제거", "한글 AI 탐지·윤문", "AI 글 사람처럼", "번역투 제거", "영어 인용 많은 글 윤문", "AI 글 티 안 나게", "휴머나이저", "humanize Korean", "AI detector bypass 한글". 후속 작업 — "특정 카테고리만 다시", "윤문 강도 조정", "장르 바꿔서", "이 문단만", "2차 윤문" 도 모두 이 스킬. 단순 맞춤법·오탈자 교정은 직접 처리, 번역은 번역 스킬, 내용 추가·삭제를 동반한 재작성은 별도 집필 스킬.
Also in 3 projects that use this
CoralGameSkillperf-profile
Structured performance profiling workflow. Identifies bottlenecks, measures against budgets, and generates optimization recommendations with priority rankings.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Rayan55050Skillcontent
Создание контента: посты, статьи, тексты
Also in 3 projects that use this
luischanciSkillproofread
Run the proofreading protocol on manuscript files. Checks grammar, typos, overflow, consistency, and academic writing quality. Produces a report without editing files.
Also in 3 projects that use this
insight68Skillpricing
Help figure out pricing for a product or service using minimalist entrepreneur principles. Use when someone is setting prices, considering price changes, or struggling with what to charge.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions74 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 2
- aya-taleb/biz-boost-skills★ 1100% same
- aya-taleb/multimedia-skills★ 1100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 72
- epoko77-ai/im-not-ai★ 6ksame name
- pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow★ 1.7ksame name
- PolyArch/humanize★ 1.5ksame name
- cwinvestments/memstack★ 425same name
- Mathews-Tom/armory★ 340same name
- whawkinsiv/solo-founder-skills★ 260same name
- whawkinsiv/claude-code-skills★ 258same name
- c-kick/hnl-agent-skills★ 56same name
- tzengyuxio/skills★ 45same name
- amondnet/yoonmoon★ 17same name
62 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- daily-planSkill
- decision-logSkill
- delegation-briefSkill
- founder-contextSkill
- meeting-actionsSkill
- personal-crmSkill
- tasksSkill
- weekly-reviewSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 62 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 23
The business file, if there is one: Always look, even for a pasted draft.
- Distinctive: line 69
Keep these while rewriting:
- Very specific: line 73
If the draft needs proof it doesn't have, leave {{your number}} or {{a real example}} and tell the founder.
- Distinctive: line 75
The business file sets the voice, not the content: Don't pull its pitch, customer count, audience or proof into the draft, even when it's …
- Distinctive: line 82
A cut beats a swap: If a phrase says nothing ("smart signals to streamline your <!-- allow-words --> workflow"), cut it rather than …
- Distinctive: line 89
Their voice, not yours: Use the tone words from the business file.
- Distinctive: line 94
These are not optional: no long dashes, no banned or avoid-list words, and no sentence over 25 words in the final draft.
- Distinctive: line 99
Run the scorer on the rewrite with the original next to it:
- Distinctive: line 116
If nothing loses points, name the two or three checks that cost the most at the start and why they mattered, so the founder learns what to …
- Very specific: line 145
If the draft came from a file, write the final version next to it as <name>.human.<ext> and say where.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 62 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
humanize
Make a draft read like a person wrote it, then show the founder why it scores what it scores. The founder posts or sends it. This skill never does.
When other skills call this
Any skill that writes words a human will post or send runs its draft through here before showing it. Return three things to the caller: the clean draft, the before and after score, and the short list of what changed. The caller shows those to the user.
What you need
- The draft. Pasted text or a file path. If there is no draft, ask for it. Do not write one from scratch here: that is the job of the skill that owns the format.
- Where it is going. LinkedIn, Instagram, email, text, landing page, doc. It decides whether Markdown is allowed. If it's obvious from the draft, don't ask.
- The business file, if there is one. Always look, even for a pasted draft. Check
founder/context.mdin the project, then~/.founder/businesses/<slug>.mdwhere<slug>is in~/.founder/active. Read it for tone words and "Words to avoid" only. If there is none, carry on with the house list and tell the founder in one line ("No business file found, so I used the house word list."). The tools find the file on their own; you read it yourself for the tone words.
Steps
1. Clean the mechanical tells
Save the draft to a file if it isn't one, then run:
python3 <skill-dir>/scripts/humanize.py draft.txt --out draft.clean.txt --swap-words<skill-dir> is the folder this SKILL.md is in. Add --strip-markdown when the draft
goes somewhere that shows ** and # as raw characters (LinkedIn, Instagram, texts,
most email). Add --allow-markdown when it goes somewhere that renders Markdown.
The tool removes hidden characters, turns long dashes into commas or periods, straightens
quotes and swaps a few always-safe words ("utilize" becomes "use"). It never touches <!-- allow-words -->
code, links, emails, @handles or #hashtags. It prints the before and after score.
Why a tool: these are character-level fixes. A script does them the same way every time and misses nothing, where reading by eye skips invisible characters.
2. Read the score report
The report lists each check that lost points, why it matters, what was found and how to fix it. Run the scorer on its own any time:
python3 <skill-dir>/scripts/detect.py draft.clean.txtPass --context <file> to point at a business file directly, --extra-banned "a, b" to
add words for this draft only, or --json when another tool will read the result.
3. Rewrite what the tool can't
The script fixes characters. Words and structure need judgment. For each flagged check,
fix it in the draft, using the suggested plainer word or the fix line in the report.
references/rewrite-guide.md has a short how-to per check.
Keep these while rewriting:
- Every fact stays, nothing new comes in. Same numbers, names, dates, links, claims
and offers. Adding a statistic or a customer story to make it "pop" is making things up.
If the draft needs proof it doesn't have, leave
{{your number}}or{{a real example}}and tell the founder. - The business file sets the voice, not the content. Don't pull its pitch, customer count, audience or proof into the draft, even when it's true. The founder chose what to say in this piece. If a line from the file would make it stronger, suggest it after the draft ("You could add: 6 offices already on the route") and let them decide.
- Don't add enthusiasm or traits. "Likes working with new tech", "does well in", "loves", "passionate about" are new claims about people. If the draft didn't say it, leave it out.
- A cut beats a swap. If a phrase says nothing ("smart signals to streamline your
<!-- allow-words -->workflow"), cut it rather than rewording it into a new claim. A reworded phrase that promises something the draft didn't ("nothing to set up", "delivered to your door") is an invented claim. - When you replace a stock phrase, use words already in the draft. "It's not just a to-do app, it's a new way to work" becomes a plain line built from what the draft says the product does, not a new description.
- Their voice, not yours. Use the tone words from the business file. If the founder writes in lowercase, uses slang, or mixes in another language, keep it.
- Same length or shorter. A cleaner draft is almost never longer.
- Don't chase 100 by gutting it. One stock word in a strong post is fine. Fix the tells that a reader would notice first: the opener, the sign-off, the banned words.
- These are not optional: no long dashes, no banned or avoid-list words, and no sentence over 25 words in the final draft. Split long ones, even the one with the proof.
4. Score again, check the facts, and hand it back
Run the scorer on the rewrite with the original next to it:
python3 <skill-dir>/scripts/detect.py draft.human.txt --compare draft.txt--compare lists numbers, links, handles and names the rewrite dropped or added, and
the words that weren't in the original. Fix every dropped or added fact. Then read the
new-word list: each one should be a plain swap, not a new claim, feature, audience or
promise ("for the people who use our product", "nothing to set up"). Cut any that are.
This step exists because rewriting for flow is exactly when made-up details sneak in.
Then show the founder:
- The final draft, ready to copy.
Score: <before> -> <after>(the before score is the original draft), then one line per check that still loses points, using the report's "why it matters" in plain words. If nothing loses points, name the two or three checks that cost the most at the start and why they mattered, so the founder learns what to watch for next time. Name anything you chose to keep and why. Say the result of the fact check in one line ("Same numbers, links and names as your draft.").- The list of changes, short: "removed 3 long dashes", "cut the stock opener", "swapped 6 avoid-list words for plain ones". Give counts, not the words: don't quote the removed words or phrases in your reply at all. The score report already names them if the founder wants detail. A reply full of the words you just removed reads like the problem, and it trips the same checks when another tool reads your reply.
- Any
{{placeholder}}the founder must fill before it goes out, and any suggestion from the business file they might want to add. If no business file was found, say so here in one line. - One closing line that they post or send it themselves, for example "Copy it into LinkedIn when you're ready. I haven't posted anything."
A reply in this shape works well (fill in the real numbers and lines):
<the final draft>
Score: 40 -> 97. These are local pattern checks, not an AI detector.
Still loses 3 points: one 27-word sentence. Long sentences make people reread.
Changed: removed 2 long dashes, cut the stock opener and sign-off, swapped 7 avoid-list
words for plain ones, cut hashtags from 7 to 3.
Fact check: same numbers, link and names as your draft.
Fill before posting: {{role title}}.
Copy it into LinkedIn when you're ready. I haven't posted anything.If the draft came from a file, write the final version next to it as
<name>.human.<ext> and say where. Don't overwrite their original unless asked. If it
was pasted, show it in the reply. Delete the in-between .clean copy when you're done,
so the founder is left with two files: their original and the final.
Your own reply follows the same rules as the draft: no long dashes, no banned words, short sentences.
Be honest about the score
Say this once, in your own words, the first time you show a score: these are pattern checks run on the founder's machine. They don't call any AI detector, and nothing can prove who wrote a text. A high score means the common tells are gone. Never promise a draft will "pass" a detector, and never offer to make text slip past a school's or employer's AI policy. The goal is writing that sounds like the founder.
Things you don't do
- Post, send, schedule or log in anywhere. Hand the text back and let the founder post it.
- Rewrite meaning, add claims, or invent quotes, numbers or results.
- Translate. If the draft is in another language, clean the characters, skip the English word lists, and say the word checks only cover English.
Adding words
The word lists live in scripts/lexicon.json, each with plainer words to use instead.
Founder-specific words go in the business file under "Words to avoid", not in the
lexicon. To add a word for everyone, add it to the lexicon with its forms and a use
list, and run the tests in tests/.
Next step
Hand back to the skill that called you, or to the founder to post or send it themselves.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

