ai-writing-diagnosis
Skill29 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
AI-writing fingerprint diagnosis for Chinese text. Use when Codex needs to inspect a draft for overly smooth, formulaic, generic, or authorless writing patterns; quote the exact passages that feel machine-made; distinguish real problems from false alarms; and suggest what to fix first without immediately rewriting the whole piece.
In this repository26 other files it gives its agents.
- benchmark-filterSkill
- book-material-minerSkill
- cc-designSkill
- celf-style-writerSkill
- content-strategy-diagnosisSkill
- deep-writerSkill
- hook-optimizerSkill
- horizontal-vertical-analysisSkill
- learning-builderSkill
- mrbeast-perspectiveSkill
- naval-perspectiveSkill
- opc-case-researchSkill
- paul-graham-perspectiveSkill
- perspective-distillerSkill
- short-video-script-builderSkill
- speech-structure-coachSkill
- spoken-script-polishSkill
- steve-jobs-perspectiveSkill
- video-packaging-diagnosisSkill
- wechat-draft-publisherSkill
- x-article-publisherSkill
- x-content-mentorSkill
- xhs-image-directorSkill
- xhs-title-selectorSkill
- youmindSkill
- zhang-yiming-perspectiveSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. About 0 are common, 14 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈14
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 11
Use this skill when the user suspects a draft feels too AI-generated, too smooth, too tidy, or too generic.
- Distinctive: line 24
Read the full text once for overall feel.
- Distinctive: line 25
Ask what genre it is if that changes the judgment materially.
- Distinctive: line 30
If the piece is mostly fine, say so.
- Distinctive: line 40
do not treat every clean sentence as "AI flavor"
- Distinctive: line 57
Before annotating details, notice the overall signal:
- Distinctive: line 75
Read references/pattern-catalog.md when classification is not obvious.
- Distinctive: line 85
Do not confuse "I notice a pattern" with "this must be fixed."
- Distinctive: line 95
If the user explicitly wants rewriting help, read references/rewrite-guidance.md before proposing next questions or edits.
- Distinctive: line 99
Default to assets/report-template.md.
- Distinctive: line 114
call everything AI just because it is neat
- Distinctive: line 130
Read for the common AI-writing fingerprints, examples, and false-alarm notes.
- Distinctive: line 132
Read for what to ask before revising and how to move from diagnosis to rewrite.
- Distinctive: line 134
Use for the standard diagnosis report.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
AI Writing Diagnosis
Overview
Use this skill when the user suspects a draft feels too AI-generated, too smooth, too tidy, or too generic.
The default task is diagnosis, not rewrite.
The goal is to show:
- where the text starts feeling machine-made
- which pattern is causing that feeling
- whether the problem actually harms the piece
- what the user should fix first if they want stronger human presence
Quick Start
- Read the full text once for overall feel.
- Ask what genre it is if that changes the judgment materially.
- Mark the strongest suspicious passages in reading order.
- Explain each issue concretely with the quoted text.
- End with the dominant pattern and the highest-leverage fix.
If the piece is mostly fine, say so. Do not force problems into the report.
Default Contract
Assume the following unless the user says otherwise:
- write in Chinese
- diagnose first, rewrite later
- judge the text in reading order
- quote the exact text when calling out a problem
- do not treat every clean sentence as "AI flavor"
- care about whether the pattern hurts expression, not whether it merely looks polished
Workflow
Step 1: Establish the Reading Context
Determine:
- the genre: article, short post, script, memo, email, thread, or caption
- whether the user wants diagnosis only
- whether the user is worried about "AI flavor" in general or a specific part
Genre matters. A short script may tolerate more compact slogans than a long essay.
Step 2: Read for Global Texture
Before annotating details, notice the overall signal:
- too smooth
- too symmetric
- too abstract
- too certain
- too generic
- or actually fine
Step 3: Annotate the Text in Order
For each suspicious passage:
- quote the line or short segment
- explain what feels off
- tag the pattern type
- note severity based on how much it harms the piece
Read references/pattern-catalog.md when classification is not obvious.
Step 4: Distinguish Real Problems from False Alarms
Examples:
- a crisp structure in a professional memo is not automatically AI
- a short social post may intentionally use slogan-like compression
- one binary contrast sentence is not a problem by itself
Do not confuse "I notice a pattern" with "this must be fixed."
Step 5: Suggest the Highest-Leverage Fix
End with:
- the dominant pattern or two
- the first places worth revising
- whether the user should self-edit or hand it to
$celf-style-writer
If the user explicitly wants rewriting help, read references/rewrite-guidance.md before proposing next questions or edits.
Output Format
Default to assets/report-template.md.
At minimum, include:
- total number of notable hits
- quoted passages in order
- concrete explanation for each hit
- dominant pattern summary
- priority fix suggestion
Hard Rules
Do not:
- rewrite the whole piece unless the user asks
- call everything AI just because it is neat
- diagnose without quoting the offending passage
- confuse stylistic preference with a real flaw
- offer fake certainty when the signal is weak
Always:
- read in sequence
- quote specific text
- explain what the pattern is doing to the reading experience
- note when a hit may be a false alarm
- end with the most useful revision priority
Resource Map
- references/pattern-catalog.md
- Read for the common AI-writing fingerprints, examples, and false-alarm notes.
- references/rewrite-guidance.md
- Read for what to ask before revising and how to move from diagnosis to rewrite.
- assets/report-template.md
- Use for the standard diagnosis report.
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.

