stop-slop

name	stop-slop
model	opus
effort	medium
description	Structural audit for AI writing patterns. Catches paragraph-level tells that word-level checks miss: false agency, binary contrasts, dramatic fragmentation, narrator-from-a-distance, formulaic rhythm. Scores on 5 dimensions (35/50 threshold). Use on content pipeline output before publishing. Invoke with /stop-slop.
user-invocable	true

Stop Slop: Structural AI Pattern Audit

Eliminate structural AI writing patterns from prose. This skill focuses on paragraph-level and structural tells that survive word-level editing. Voice-Profile.md handles banned words/phrases. This handles the architecture of the writing.

When to Use

• Content pipeline output (articles, Reddit posts, X threads) before publishing
• As part of /write-article Stage 5 review panel
• In content agent humanize mode as Pass 3 (structural audit)
• Manual invocation via /stop-slop on any draft

Do NOT run on: Jules conversational output, internal docs, code comments, quick replies.

Core Rules

1. Break formulaic structures. No binary contrasts ("Not X. Y."), negative listings, dramatic fragmentation, rhetorical setups. See references/structures.md.

2. Kill false agency. Inanimate things don't perform human actions. "The complaint becomes a fix" = no. "The team fixed it" = yes. Name the human actor.

3. Use active voice. Every sentence needs a subject doing something. No passive constructions hiding the actor.

4. Be specific. No vague declaratives ("The reasons are structural"). Name the specific thing.

5. Put the reader in the room. No narrator-from-a-distance. "You" beats "People." Specifics beat abstractions.

6. Vary rhythm. Mix sentence lengths. Two items beat three. End paragraphs differently. No em dashes. No staccato fragmentation stacking.

7. Trust readers. State facts directly. Skip softening, justification, hand-holding.

8. Cut quotables. If it sounds like a pull-quote, rewrite it.

9. No formulaic article structure. Don't default to: intro hook, context, 3-5 body sections, takeaway, CTA. Vary. No "Final thoughts" or "Key takeaways" headers. No rhetorical questions as section transitions.

10. Commit or don't claim. No hedging every other sentence with "might," "could potentially," "it remains to be seen." Either make the claim or drop it.

Quick Checks

Before delivering prose, scan for:

• Inanimate thing doing a human verb? Name the person.
• "Not X, it's Y" binary contrast? State Y directly.
• Three consecutive sentences match length? Break one.
• Paragraph ends with punchy one-liner? Vary it.
• Any "here's what/this/that" throat-clearing? Cut to the point.
• Narrator-from-a-distance ("Nobody designed this")? Put the reader in the scene.
• Formulaic structure (hook, context, 3 body sections, takeaway)? Vary it.
• Rule-of-three construction? Use two items or one.
• Synonym cycling (protagonist, main character, central figure)? Just repeat the clearest word.
• "Serves as" / "stands as" / "features" instead of "is" / "has"? Use the simple copula.
• False range ("from X to Y" where the scale is meaningless)? List topics directly.
• Sentence lengths clustering in 10-20 word range? Calculate SD of word counts per sentence. SD < 8 = metronomic (AI tell). [Your Name]'s writing: SD 9-14.

Scoring Rubric

Rate 1-10 on each dimension:

Dimension	Question
Directness	Does it state things or announce them? Is it making points or building up to them?
Rhythm	Do sentence lengths vary naturally, or is the cadence metronomic? Any staccato stacking? Burstiness check: Calculate the standard deviation of sentence word counts across the draft. Human writing typically has SD > 8 words ([Your Name]'s samples: SD 9-14). Flag if SD < 8 as "metronomic uniformity" and cap Rhythm score at 6/10 regardless of other rhythm qualities. Report the SD value in the audit output.
Trust	Does it respect reader intelligence, or does it soften, justify, and hand-hold?
Authenticity	Does it sound like a specific human wrote it, or like median-internet-text?
Density	Is every sentence doing work, or is there cuttable filler?

Threshold: 35/50. Below 35: surface specific failing patterns with suggested rewrites. The human reviewer must explicitly approve or revise before publication.

Calibration note: 35/50 was calibrated against [Your Name]'s published articles (scored 38-44) and raw voice samples (scored 40-47). Adjust if publishing standards change.

Output Format

When invoked as an audit:

## Stop-Slop Audit

**Score: [N]/50** (Directness: X | Rhythm: X | Trust: X | Authenticity: X | Density: X)
**Burstiness:** Sentence length SD = X.X words (threshold: 8.0 | [Your Name] baseline: 9-14)

### Findings

[List each structural pattern found, with line reference and severity]

### Suggested Rewrites

[For each finding, show the original and a rewritten version]

### Verdict

PASS (score >= 35) / REVISE (score < 35, with specific items to address)

References

• references/phrases.md — Phrase-level patterns to cut (deduplicated against Voice-Profile.md)
• references/structures.md — Structural anti-patterns with examples
• references/examples.md — Before/after transformations