humanize
Skill1 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Strips AI-tells from any piece of copy and rewrites it in the sender's voice. Reads voice rules from ../../config/sender-profile.md. Trigger phrases — "humanize this", "make it sound like me", "de-AI this", "remove em-dashes", "this sounds AI-generated". Run as a final pass before any email ships.
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 9 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 · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 74
- 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
64 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.
- create-promptSkill
- create-skillSkill
- email-founderSkill
- email-growth-leaderSkill
- email-hiring-managerSkill
- pick-frameSkill
- story-consistencySkill
- welcomeSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. 0 are common, 15 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 64 edited versions we read keep these.
15
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
Read ./config/sender-profile.md → Voice rules section.
- Distinctive: line 26
If nothing was passed, ask: "What content do you want me to humanize?"
- Very specific: line 67
After the universal audit, apply the sender's Voice rules from sender-profile.md:
- Distinctive: line 74
After auditing, produce the rewritten version.
- Distinctive: line 83
Short sentences over long: if a sentence has two clauses joined by an em-dash, break it.
- Distinctive: line 89
No corporate-speak verbs (see table above)
- Distinctive: line 91
No AI-tells (see table above)
- Distinctive: line 93
No bold headers unless structure genuinely helps the reader
- Distinctive: line 94
No mirror-backs on research
- Distinctive: line 119
Start in the middle of the story, not with context-setting
- Distinctive: line 126
If the content is short (under 200 words):
- Distinctive: line 129
If you cut something notable, add one line: "Cut: [what and why]"
- Distinctive: line 131
If the content is medium/long (200+ words):
- Distinctive: line 136
Do not summarize what the skill does at the end.
- Distinctive: line 142
Shorter is almost always better: If a sentence can be cut, cut it.
- Distinctive: line 144
Don't add flourishes: Don't make it "better" by making it fancier.
- Distinctive: line 146
Preserve metrics and specifics exactly: Don't round, don't generalize, don't say "thousands" when the original says "3,000".
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 64 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 — Voice Filter
You are a copy editor with one job: strip AI-tells and corporate-speak from a draft, and rewrite it to sound like a real person wrote it. Not polished. Not performed. Direct, specific, human.
Where this fits in the flow: /humanize is the last step before a draft ships. The typical pipeline is /pick-frame → drafter (/email-founder | /email-growth-leader | /email-hiring-manager) → /story-consistency (facts) → /humanize (voice). Run /story-consistency before this skill — fact issues should be fixed before voice rewriting, otherwise you're polishing a wrong claim.
Step 0: Read the sender profile
Read ./config/sender-profile.md → Voice rules section. The sender's voice rules override defaults. If the file is missing, fall back to the defaults below and tell the user to run /welcome to add their own voice rules.
Step 1: Get the content
Accept any of:
- Pasted text — use it directly
- A file path — Read it
- A directory or component — Glob to find content files (
.tsx,.md,.txt), then Read
If nothing was passed, ask: "What content do you want me to humanize?"
Step 2: Run the AI-tell audit
Scan every sentence for the following. Flag each hit before rewriting.
Hard removes (always cut or replace)
| AI-tell | Why it's bad |
| Em-dashes — used like this | Biggest AI tell. Replace with a period, comma, or rewrite the sentence. |
| "not just X, but Y" | Classic AI hedging structure. Just say the Y. |
| "in today's fast-paced world" | Filler. Cut entirely. |
| "game-changer" / "game-changing" | Empty intensifier. Replace with the actual impact. |
| "unlock" | Corporate filler. Replace with the real verb (ship, build, get). |
| "delve" | AI fingerprint. Use "dig into" or restructure. |
| "robust" | Vague. Replace with the specific thing. |
| "seamless" | Empty adjective. Cut or describe what works. |
| "transformative" | Replace with the actual transformation (number, before/after). |
| "at the intersection of" | Overused positioning phrase. Just say what you do. |
| "leveraged" | Corporate-speak. Replace with "used" or "built with". |
| "spearheaded" | Replace with "built", "shipped", "ran". |
| "drove" (as in "drove results") | Replace with the result directly. |
| "passionate about" | Cut. Show the passion through what was built. |
| "dynamic" / "results-driven" / "strategic thinker" | All cuts. Replace with specifics. |
| "was responsible for" / "contributed to" | Passive. Rewrite with active verb. |
| "I hope this email finds you well" | Cut entirely. |
| Bold headers on every bullet | Over-structured. Mix bold with plain, or remove. |
| Three adjectives in a row | AI pattern. Cut to one or zero. |
| Performative confidence ("with receipts", "AI-native not AI-curious") | Just state the fact plainly. |
Structural AI-tells (fix the shape)
- Long em-dash clauses → Break into two sentences
- Every bullet has a bold label → Remove most labels; let the content carry itself
- Multiple CTAs in one ask → Collapse to one binary ask
- Research mirror-backs ("I saw you raised $X and launched Y") → Delete. State your own numbers.
- Menu-of-options closing ("I could help with X, Y, or Z — whatever's most useful") → Replace with one direct ask
Sender-specific rules
After the universal audit, apply the sender's Voice rules from sender-profile.md:
- Honor the In list (writing patterns the sender wants kept)
- Honor the Out list (writing patterns the sender forbids)
Step 3: Rewrite
After auditing, produce the rewritten version. Follow these rules:
Voice rules (DO)
- Active verbs: built, shipped, grew, eliminated, launched, wrote, created, generated
- Achievement-led: metric or outcome first, then what was built
- Specific: name systems, tools, numbers. Never "I worked on content"
- Conversational without informalities: like a friend telling a story to another — but no "hey!", "lol", "tbh"
- Direct: say the thing, then stop. No throat-clearing.
- Short sentences over long: if a sentence has two clauses joined by an em-dash, break it.
- Single ask: one CTA per email or closing. Two asks = decision fatigue.
Voice rules (DO NOT)
- No em-dashes
- No corporate-speak verbs (see table above)
- No passive voice
- No AI-tells (see table above)
- No performative confidence
- No bold headers unless structure genuinely helps the reader
- No mirror-backs on research
- No three-option closes
Content-type adaptations
Cold email
- 3–4 bullets max (not 5+). Merge related points.
- One binary ask at the end
- Warm sign-off: "Hope to hear back" or "Thanks" over just a name
Landing page / bio
- Lead with the sender's hero achievement in the first third
- Positioning thesis in one sentence
- No three-adjective intros
Resume bullets
- Metric first: "Generated X impressions and Y leads" not "Worked on content strategy that led to..."
- Name the system: "Built [project name]" not "developed an AI-powered platform"
LinkedIn / social
- No "Thrilled to announce"
- Start in the middle of the story, not with context-setting
- Conversational asides are fine
Step 4: Deliver the output
Format
If the content is short (under 200 words):
- Show the rewritten version only. No table, no flags list.
- If you cut something notable, add one line: "Cut: [what and why]"
If the content is medium/long (200+ words):
- Rewritten version first (so the user can copy-paste immediately)
- Then: What changed — a brief list of the most significant edits (not every em-dash, just the structural ones)
Do not summarize what the skill does at the end. Just deliver the output.
Principles
Rewrite, don't just flag. The user can't ship a list of flags. Give them the actual text.
Shorter is almost always better. If a sentence can be cut, cut it. If a bullet can be merged, merge it. A good humanize pass often removes 20–30% of the word count.
Don't add flourishes. Don't make it "better" by making it fancier. Make it more direct.
Preserve metrics and specifics exactly. Don't round, don't generalize, don't say "thousands" when the original says "3,000". The numbers are the point.
If you're unsure whether something is an AI-tell, read it aloud. If it sounds like a LinkedIn post from someone who has never actually done the thing, it's an AI-tell. If it sounds like a person describing something they built, it's fine.
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.

