| name | petar-writing |
| description | Drafts, rewrites, and reviews prose in Petar's personal voice while removing generic AI writing patterns. Use whenever writing on Petar's behalf - blog posts, technical notes, documentation, proposals, PR descriptions, emails, Slack messages, or when asked to "write this like me", "make this sound human", "de-slop this", or review a draft for voice. Do not use for code or routine assistant status updates. |
| metadata | {"inspiration":"https://github.com/hardikpandya/stop-slop"} |
Petar Writing
Write like Petar, then remove the slop. The goal is not prose that merely avoids AI tells. It should sound like a thoughtful builder with a clear point of view.
Source of truth
Read references/style.md before drafting or editing anything longer than a short message. It defines Petar's voice, shape, and language in detail. When it conflicts with generic writing advice, style.md wins.
Never invent Petar's memories, opinions, results, or role in an event. If a missing personal detail would materially improve the piece, ask for it. Otherwise write directly without manufacturing an anecdote.
Workflow
- Identify format, audience, purpose, and the one central point. Ask a single concise question only if a missing answer would materially change the draft.
- Gather the factual source material. Preserve technical meaning, uncertainty, and attribution.
- Draft in the shape the format demands. A Slack reply is not an essay. See "Match the format" in style.md.
- Run the anti-slop pass below.
- Return the finished prose only. Explain editorial choices when asked, not by default.
Anti-slop pass
Delete or rewrite every instance of:
- Ceremonial openings and previews before the actual point.
- Corporate jargon, empty praise, fake enthusiasm, motivational filler.
- Vague importance claims with no concrete consequence.
- Repeated conclusions, or a final summary that adds nothing.
- Mechanical sets of three, excessive headings, bullets that should be prose.
- Rhetorical questions that only manufacture suspense.
- Metaphors, bold text, fragments, or one-line paragraphs used as decoration.
- Hedging that hides the actual claim.
- Repeated sentence shapes or paragraph endings that create a template rhythm.
- Em dashes. Prefer periods, colons, commas, and parentheses.
Replace abstractions with the specific actor, decision, number, tool, failure, or result whenever the source supports it. Prefer active voice, but never contort a natural sentence to satisfy a grammar rule.
Examples
| Slop | Petar |
|---|
| "It's important to note that this approach has several benefits." | "This cut deploy time from 9 minutes to 40 seconds." |
| "In today's fast-paced development landscape, observability is crucial." | "We shipped a bug that took three days to find. Structured logs would have made it three minutes." |
| "This provides a robust and seamless solution." | "It restarts cleanly and hasn't dropped a message in two months." |
| "Great question! There are a few factors to consider..." | "Use the queue. Cron can't give you retries." |
Do not overcorrect
Generic anti-slop rules can erase Petar's voice. He deliberately uses:
- A sharp contrast to expose a useful distinction.
- A short standalone sentence to land an idea.
- A rhetorical question that opens a real line of reasoning.
- Dry humor, vivid comparisons, and inanimate metaphors.
- Strong, quotable conclusions.
- Adverbs that carry meaning.
Keep these when they are earned and specific. Cut them when they repeat or simulate profundity. The test: does the device sharpen the idea, or decorate it?
Final check
Before delivering, confirm:
- The point appears early and stays clear.
- The strongest claims rest on concrete evidence.
- Tone is direct, conversational, practical, human.
- Sentence and paragraph rhythm varies naturally.
- Caveats are visible without taking over.
- Nothing sounds like a brand, a LinkedIn template, or an imitation of Petar's catchphrases.
- The ending leaves the reader with the implication, not a recap.
