Menu
Applies Vonnegut's 8 rules for writing. Start close to the end, give characters wants, be a sadist, etc.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
| name | vonnegut |
| description | Applies Vonnegut's 8 rules for writing. Start close to the end, give characters wants, be a sadist, etc. |
| user_invocable | true |
Check your writing against Kurt Vonnegut's eight rules for fiction—which apply to nonfiction too. This skill audits your piece for the fundamentals that make stories work.
Use this when:
/vonnegut [text] — Audit the provided text against the 8 rules/vonnegut — System asks "What piece should I audit?"Every sentence must do one of two things: reveal character or advance the action. If it does neither, cut it.
Check: Is there anything here that a reader would skip? Anything that made you feel smart but doesn't serve them?
Even in nonfiction, readers need someone to follow. That might be you, a subject, or a stand-in for the reader.
Check: Who does the reader care about in this piece? Why should they want that person to succeed?
Want creates movement. A character (or writer, or reader) who wants nothing is dead on the page.
Check: What does the main figure in this piece want? Is that want visible from the start?
This is rule one restated as a practical test. If a sentence fails both, it goes.
Check: Can you justify every sentence? What would be lost if it disappeared?
Don't give backstory. Don't set up. Start where things are already happening.
Check: Where does this piece actually begin? Could you cut the first paragraph and lose nothing?
Conflict reveals character. Comfort hides it. Your subjects (including yourself) should struggle.
Check: What's hard in this piece? Where's the difficulty, failure, or resistance?
If you try to please everyone, you'll please no one. Write as if for a single specific reader.
Check: Who is this piece for? Can you name them? Would they recognize themselves?
No mysteries for mystery's sake. No withholding to seem clever. Trust the reader with information.
Check: Are you hiding anything that the reader should know earlier? Are you being coy?
## Vonnegut Audit
### Rule-by-Rule Check
| Rule | Verdict | Notes |
|------|---------|-------|
| 1. Time well spent | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
| 2. Someone to root for | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
| 3. Character wants something | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
| 4. Every sentence earns its place | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
| 5. Starts close to the end | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
| 6. Sadist (conflict present) | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
| 7. Written for one person | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
| 8. Information given freely | ✓ / ✗ | [Brief note] |
---
### The Main Issue
**Biggest violation:** [Which rule is most broken and why]
**How to fix it:** [Specific suggestion]
---
### Other Notes
[Any other observations that don't fit the rules but matter]
---
Pass: [X/8 rules]
[Skill-specific lessons will be added here as they're captured]
Reads your writing through the meanest, least-charitable lens. Challenges every claim, questions every assumption, pokes holes in the logic. Use for later drafts when you want hard feedback.
Run a multi-round deliberation between reviewers. Unlike /panel (which synthesizes), /debate has reviewers respond to each other's arguments across rounds until tensions resolve or reach acknowledged stalemate.
Review a draft for big-picture issues—argument, structure, stakes, and payoff. Invoke with /dev-edit after drafting or with any draft the user provides.
Checks writing for clarity and accessibility. Flags jargon without explanation, hand-wavy process descriptions, and skipped steps. Ensures content is specific enough for experts AND clear enough for newcomers. Use when reviewing technical or process-heavy writing.
Scan any Every draft for recurring editorial-review failures: clarity and evidence gaps, argument problems, mechanics red flags, second-order AI tells, and, for Working Overtime only, column-specific voice tics and structural throat-clearing. Use when reviewing or polishing Every writing before submission. Reports findings with line-level diagnoses and suggested fixes. Pairs with ai-check and every-style.
Cuts ruthlessly. Flags every adjective, adverb, and unnecessary word. Demands you kill your darlings.