style-tells

name

style-tells

description

Scrubs the three surface tells that make prose feel AI-generated, padded, or jargon-heavy. Three targets behind one skill, picked via the --target arg. em-dashes (default off in cold email / memo / Slack, max one per page in op-eds), adverbs (the -ly and intensifier pile), jargon (the Silicon Valley / consultant kill-list plus AI-tell phrases). Use when the user says "kill the AI tells," "scrub jargon," "remove em-dashes," "cut the adverbs," "make this sound human," "less corporate," "sounds like ChatGPT," "—," "very," "really," "leverage," "synergy," "delve," "tapestry." Pass --target em-dashes|adverbs|jargon|all (default all).

Style tells

Source: points/ai-writing-rules.md (em-dash rule), points/core-rules.md rule 5 (be shorter), points/banned-jargon.md, and Stephen King's On Writing (the adverb rule).

What this skill does

Three passes behind one skill. Each pass removes a different surface tell that flags writing as AI-generated, padded, or jargon-heavy:

Target	What it removes	When to run alone
em-dashes	em-dashes (—), double-hyphens (--), the "not just X — it's Y" construction	When the only problem is AI-flavored punctuation
adverbs	empty intensifiers, -ly adverbs the verb already implies, sentence-starting adverbs	When the draft is bloated with qualifiers
jargon	banned consultant words, AI-tell phrases, wordy substitutions	When the draft sounds corporate or AI-generated

Default --target all runs all three in order: jargon → adverbs → em-dashes. The order matters: jargon and adverbs often expose dashes that were holding bloated clauses together.

How to invoke

/style-tells "draft text"
/style-tells --target em-dashes "draft text"
/style-tells --target adverbs "draft text"
/style-tells --target jargon "draft text"
/style-tells --target all "draft text"

Without --target, default to all.

---

Target 1 — em-dashes

In 2026 the em-dash is the #1 AI tell. Models love them. Humans use them sparingly. A draft with twelve em-dashes per page is a confession that an AI wrote it.

Format limits

Format	Em-dashes allowed
Cold email	Zero
Memo / status update	Zero
Slack message	Zero
LinkedIn post	One, max
Op-ed / essay	One per page (~250 words), max two
Substack post	One per major section break

Over the limit → scrub.

Substitution table

Pattern	Rewrite options
X — Y (parenthetical aside)	X (Y) or X, Y, or X: Y
X — and Y (continuing thought)	X. And Y. or X, and Y
X — Y — Z (interrupted clause)	X, Y, Z (commas) or X. Y. Z. (sentences)
If — and only if — Z	If, and only if, Z
I built X — A, B, C — from scratch	I built X from scratch: A, B, C.
She said — wait, did she?	She said. Wait, did she?
It's not just X — it's Y (AI tic)	Cut entirely. Rewrite without the construction.

The right substitution depends on what the em-dash was doing:

• Aside / clarification → parenthesis or colon
• List or apposition → colon
• Tone shift / interruption → period (start a new sentence)
• Connective ("and so") → "and," "so," or comma

When NOT to remove

• Inside a direct quote from someone else (preserve their punctuation)
• Inside dialogue if the speaker would naturally pause that way
• Inside a code block, file path, or URL
• Inside a quoted citation (e.g., a book title rendered with em-dash)

If unsure, ask the user.

---

Target 2 — adverbs

"The adverb is not your friend. The road to hell is paved with adverbs." — Stephen King

Most adverbs are evidence the verb wasn't strong enough. "She walked quickly" → "she rushed." "He smiled broadly" → "he grinned." "It is very important" → "it matters."

Adverbs also leak the writer's anxiety: "clearly," "obviously," "of course" are tells that the writer is afraid the reader won't agree. Kill them; let the argument stand.

Category A — empty intensifiers (cut on sight, ~95% of the time)

Cut	Why
very	If "very" makes a difference, the adjective was wrong. "Very tired" → "exhausted."
really	Same problem. "Really fast" → "fast" or "blistering."
actually	Almost always pure throat-clearing.
basically	Filler. Cut.
literally	If metaphorical, cut. If literal, you don't need to say so.
definitely	Hedge dressed up as confidence. Just say it.
clearly	The reader decides what's clear. Don't tell them.
obviously	Same problem, plus condescending.
essentially	Filler.
simply	Often patronizing. Cut.
quite	British, weak. Cut.
rather	Hedge. Cut.
somewhat	Hedge. Cut or commit.
pretty (as in "pretty good")	Cut — softens the claim.
truly, genuinely	If you have to say it, they don't believe you.
arguably	Then make the argument.

Category B — adverbs the verb already implies (rewrite the verb)

Adverb + weak verb	Stronger verb
walked quickly	rushed, sprinted, hurried
said loudly	shouted, barked
said quietly	whispered, murmured
smiled broadly	grinned, beamed
held tightly	clutched, gripped
ran very fast	sprinted
looked carefully	examined, scrutinized
ate quickly	wolfed down, devoured

Category C — sentence-starting adverbs (almost always cut)

Cut	Why
Importantly,	If it's important, the sentence shows it
Notably,	Same
Interestingly,	Let the reader decide
Surprisingly,	Same
Frankly,	What were you being before?
Honestly,	Same
Crucially,	If it's crucial, write a stronger sentence
Ultimately,	Usually filler
Fundamentally,	Filler

Adverbs to keep (the 5% that earn their place)

• They specify when, where, or how-much that the verb can't carry. "She arrived early" — the adverb is the whole point.
• They preserve a deliberate cadence. "He walked slowly, then faster, then ran" — the contrast does work.
• They are the joke. "She, very politely, told him to fuck off."
• In dialogue. Real people say "really" and "actually."
• In specifications. "The query runs roughly twice as fast" — "roughly" carries epistemic weight.

If you can't articulate why the adverb earns its place, cut it.

---

Target 3 — jargon

Two operations: find every banned word, AI tell, and wordy phrase, then replace with the shortest, plainest alternative. If a sentence collapses without the jargon, the sentence was empty; cut it.

The kill list

Silicon Valley / academic jargon (always) currently, synergy, synergize, leverage, align, drive, strategize, empower, enable, deliverables, utilize, incentivize, facilitate, impact (as a verb), at the intersection of, driving innovation, building and scaling, passionate about complex problems

Grammar errors

• irregardless → regardless
• literally (when used metaphorically)
• ironic (when you mean coincidental)

Wordy phrases

Replace	With
In the event that	If
Concerning the matter of	About
I came to the realization that	I realized
We are investigating	We're investigating
Negative impacts	Harm
Positive impacts	Benefits
Sorry for the delay	Thanks for your patience
I think maybe we should	Let's
Utilize	Use
In today's fast-paced world	(delete)
I hope this email finds you well	(delete)
Just wanted to check in	(delete or replace with real content)

AI tells (scrub)

• "It's not just X — it's Y." (most common AI tic)
• "In today's [adjective] world"
• "Delve into"
• "Navigate the complexities of"
• "Tapestry of"
• "Robust solution"
• "Cutting-edge"
• "Game-changer"
• Tricolons everywhere ("X, Y, and Z" three times in three sentences)
• Hedge-then-commit: "While there are many considerations, ultimately…"

Cold-email-specific killers

• "I hope you are well"
• "My name is X"
• "Good morning" / "Good afternoon" (timezone unknown)
• "I'd love to pick your brain"
• "I'd love to grab coffee"
• "Just following up"

---

How to run the pass

Pass 1 — Inventory

Scan the draft. For each target requested via --target, mark every hit. Count.

Pass 2 — Categorize and rewrite

For each hit, decide:

• Em-dash: what was the dash doing? Aside / list / shift / connective → pick the right substitution.
• Adverb: empty intensifier (cut), verb-implied (rewrite verb), sentence-starter (cut), or earns its place (keep with one-line reason).
• Jargon: plain-English replacement, or cut the sentence if it collapses.

Pass 3 — Read aloud

Did the prose get tighter, plainer, more human? If something now reads worse, the original word was doing real work. Put it back.

Output format

## Inventory
em-dashes: N
adverbs: N
jargon hits: N
Total: N

## Hits (grouped by target)

### em-dashes
1. Line N: "the original sentence with the —"
   Function: aside | apposition | tone-shift | connective
   Rewrite: "the rewritten sentence"

### adverbs
1. Line N: "the original sentence"
   Removed: <word> (category: empty intensifier / verb-implied / sentence-starter)
   Rewrite: "the rewritten sentence"

### jargon
1. Line N: "the original sentence with the jargon"
   Banned: <word/phrase>
   Rewrite: "the rewritten sentence"
   Or cut entirely if: <reason>

## Kept with reason
- "she arrived early" — adverb is the point (specifies when)
- "the query runs roughly twice as fast" — epistemic hedge, earns its place

## Clean draft
[The full text with every requested target replaced. No commentary.]

The litmus test

Read the rewrite aloud. Does the prose sound more like a human typing on a keyboard than the original? If yes, ship. If the rewrite reads jagged or robotic, back off — try a different substitution.

The goal is human prose, not purity.

When the user pushes back on jargon cuts

Common: "but my industry uses these words."

Response: "Your industry says them. Your readers tune them out. The people who get read are the ones who don't sound like everyone else."

When NOT to run

• Direct quotes from someone else — preserve their words verbatim.
• Dialogue in fiction or scene-writing — adverbs and em-dashes are how people actually talk and pause.
• Legal or technical specs where the adverb has precise meaning (approximately, substantially, materially can have legal weight).
• Poetry, song lyrics, rhythm-driven prose — sometimes a "softly" is doing musical work.