natural-writing
Skill1 starsChanged 6 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use to write, rewrite, tighten or diagnose emails and general, mixed, correspondence or academic/thesis prose without losing facts, citations or numbers; owns Australian English and the AI-prose mechanisms. Not for READMEs, commits or docs (engineering-writing) or Australian legal drafting (legal-writing).
15 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- miguchn/migu_skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Seashell113/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- fang2hou/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- gabeosx/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- mattychesterton-spec/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- Vivswan/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 16, 2026
Other versions15 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 15
- a2ui-project/a2ui★ 17ksame name
- google/A2UI★ 17ksame name
- Rylaispirit/rylai-codex-hermes-skills★ 56same name
- gabeosx/agent-skills★ 6same name
- 0mlkrizzz655335v/claude-skills-zh★ 2same name
- anotb/natural-writing★ 2same name
- fang2hou/skills★ 2same name
- jimliddle/natural-writing-edge-gallery-skill★ 2same name
- miguchn/migu_skill★ 2same name
- LarrySequino/skills★ 1same name
5 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 repository21 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- code-reviewSkill
- deliverSkill
- diagnoseSkill
- engineering-docsSkill
- engineering-writingSkill
- evaluateSkill
- implementSkill
- legal-writingSkill
- orchestrateSkill
- refactorSkill
- releaseSkill
- retrospectSkill
- scopeSkill
- sessionSkill
- setup-repoSkill
- skill-craftSkill
- test-designSkill
- trackerSkill
- ui-ux-designSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 16
Don't fabricate experience, sources or detail, or add fake messiness.
- Very specific: line 20
Use the punctuation the sentence needs, without em-dashes.
- Distinctive: line 23
Never style-pass gates, ADR decisions or process runbooks.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 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
Natural writing
The family's writing hub, owning prose doctrine: fidelity locking, the
mechanism catalogue, Australian English, claim discipline and academic prose.
engineering-writing and legal-writing add a domain overlay and link here.
Hard rules
- Facts don't move. Style passes are where they drift, so lock them (step 1) and audit against the lock (step 4).
- Don't fabricate experience, sources or detail, or add fake messiness.
Flag each gap (
[FLAG: cite source]). - Edit for the reader, never a detector score. Formal prose isn't proof of AI authorship.
- Use the punctuation the sentence needs, without em-dashes. Run
provenant check writingwhen available: it flags em-dashes and lexical hints, its silence is necessary but not sufficient, and its word rules are advisory. - Never style-pass gates, ADR decisions or process runbooks.
- A supplied voice sample beats these defaults.
Target
A direct claim, a plain verb, an anchor from the source (number, name, path, date, honest negative), one calibrated qualifier, and an ending on the decision, risk or next action. The default voice is plain and mildly casual (voice.md); a formal register is the exception.
Procedure
Pick the least invasive pass: light-touch (repair named defects), rewrite (default) or diagnose (findings only, no edit). If the draft already reads well, edit lightly and say so.
- Lock facts, numbers, names, quotes, citation keys, defined terms, modals and negations. List them first; they're the fidelity contract.
- Diagnose by mechanism, not phrase. Read mechanisms.md and name the two or three that cost the reader most. A swapped synonym leaves the mechanism, so the tell moves to the next word.
- Rewrite once, by mechanism, in voice.md's register. Restate each claim directly and add only anchors the source holds.
- Audit independently. Compare the locked list against the result and
revert any sentence that lost or strengthened a claim.
- High-stakes prose: a separate clean-context reviewer sees only the before and after.
- Number-heavy text: script the comparison (claim-discipline.md).
- Long documents: split reviewers by lens (redundancy, register) and triage their findings yourself.
- Report the final text first, with notes only for material flags.
References
- voice.md: load before any write or rewrite. The default register, rules, example and formal exceptions.
- mechanisms.md: the defects, each with a reason and a before/after pair.
- tells-2026.md: read before judging a draft's age. What current models still do and what has faded, dated and sourced.
- au-english.md: house style unless a repository, quote, API or form requires otherwise.
- condense-pass.md: shortening, with a stop rule.
- claim-discipline.md: observed, inferred, planned and pending claims; comparatives that carry their number.
- academic-prose.md: thesis and paper
register, citation-key preservation, evidence altitude. LaTeX invariants
live in
engineering-writing.
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.

