human-writing

name	human-writing
description	Edit, audit, or rewrite prose so it sounds like a specific human wrote it, not a generic AI draft. Removes AI tells, filler, formulaic structure, fake polish, vague claims, and detector-bait phrasing while preserving truth, voice, and audience fit. Use when: "humanize this", "make this sound less AI", "remove AI slop", "de-slop this", "edit this prose", "make this sound natural", "fix the writing voice", "rewrite this copy". Trigger: /human-writing, /deslop.
argument-hint	[text|file|draft] [--audit|--rewrite|--in-place] [--voice terse|warm|technical|plain|blunt]

/human-writing

Make prose sound authored, not generated. Preserve meaning and attribution. Do not optimize for bypassing detectors or misrepresent authorship.

Route

Need	Action
Quick rewrite in chat	Rewrite directly; include a short change note.
File edit	Patch the file; preserve frontmatter, links, claims, code, and citations.
Audit only	Return findings ranked by severity with examples and fixes.
Public product copy	Compose with /showcase for evidence-gated claims.
UI copy	Compose with /design; visible copy must match the interface job.
Deep pattern check	Read references/patterns.md.

Contract

• Keep the author's claim, audience, and constraints intact.
• Cut filler before changing voice.
• Replace vague importance with specific evidence or delete it.
• Name actors where the draft hides them.
• Vary rhythm without adding theatrics.
• Keep technical terms, legal terms, quotes, citations, commands, and API names exact unless the user asks to change them.
• When facts are weak, flag them. Do not invent concrete details to sound human.

Edit Pass

1. Identify the job: publishable copy, email, docs, report, social post, internal note, or UI text.
2. Infer or ask for voice only when it changes the edit. Default to plain, direct, and domain-specific.
3. Mark the top 3 AI tells: filler phrase, formulaic contrast, vague claim, false agency, over-polish, rhythm monotony, or generic enthusiasm.
4. Rewrite in the target voice. Preserve facts first, style second.
5. Run the final check: fewer words, clearer actors, no fake specificity, no detector-bypass framing.

Severity

Level	Meaning
P0	Misleading, invented, overclaiming, or authorship/detector evasion risk.
P1	Strong AI tell that hurts trust or publishability.
P2	Style drag: filler, rhythm, jargon, or excess polish.

Output

For rewrites:

[rewritten text]

Notes: cut <pattern>; preserved <claim/source>; residual risk <if any>.

For audits:

Findings
- P1 <pattern>: "<short excerpt>" -> <fix>

Verdict: publish / revise / needs source.

Gotchas

• Detector laundering. If the user asks to bypass GPTZero, Turnitin, Originality.ai, or similar detectors, reframe to honest editorial quality.
• Fake human detail. Do not add anecdotes, names, dates, citations, or sensory detail that the source does not support.
• Voice flattening. "Professional" often becomes generic. Preserve domain vocabulary and the writer's useful oddities.
• Over-cutting. Some passive voice and repetition are correct in legal, scientific, compliance, and API docs. Fix the writing job, not a checklist.
• One-note bluntness. Direct prose can still be kind, precise, or technical. Do not turn every draft into a hardboiled memo.

Completion

Name what changed: patterns removed, claims preserved, any weak facts flagged, and whether the result is ready to publish or needs source review.