| name | reviewing-prose |
| description | ALWAYS invoke this skill when reviewing, editing, or improving prose for quality. NEVER review prose without this skill. |
Detect and fix formulaic patterns that signal machine-generated or lazy writing. Flag specific violations and suggest concrete rewrites.
<quick_start>
Core rule: Zero tolerance. Every pattern in the reference catalog is a violation. Do not excuse any instance as "single use" or "it lands here." If a sentence triggers a pattern, flag it. If a sentence triggers two patterns simultaneously, it is the highest priority flag.
Before reviewing, read /standardizing-prose for the complete catalog of 30+ anti-patterns across 6 categories.
</quick_start>
<essential_principles>
Six categories of patterns to detect. Each is detailed with examples in the reference file.
Word choice -- Significance adverbs ("quietly", "deeply"), authenticity adverbs ("genuinely", "truly", "actually"), overused vocabulary ("delve", "leverage", "robust", "genuine"), ornate nouns ("tapestry", "landscape", "paradigm"), pompous verbs ("serves as", "stands as").
Sentence structure -- Negative parallelism ("It's not X -- it's Y"), stacked negations ("Not X. Not Y. Just Z."), rhetorical self-answers ("The result? Devastating."), anaphora abuse, tricolon stacking, filler transitions ("It's worth noting"), tacked-on significance ("highlighting its importance"), false ranges, gerund fragment litanies, tautological definitions ("An irreversible change does not revert"), redundant paired examples.
Paragraph structure -- Strings of punchy fragments as standalone paragraphs, listicles disguised as prose ("The first... The second... The third...").
Tone -- False-suspense transitions ("Here's the kicker"), unnecessary metaphors ("Think of it as..."), hypothetical openers ("Imagine a world where..."), performed vulnerability, asserting clarity ("The truth is simple"), grandiose stakes inflation, teacher-student condescension ("Let's break this down"), vague attributions ("Experts argue"), invented concept labels ("the supervision paradox").
Formatting -- Em-dash overuse, bold-first bullets, unicode decoration.
Composition -- Fractal summaries, dead metaphors, historical analogy stacking, one-point dilution, content duplication, signposted conclusions, dismissive optimism ("Despite its challenges...").
</essential_principles>
- Read
/standardizing-prose for the anti-pattern catalog
- Read the text to review
- Flag each violation with the specific pattern name and category
- Suggest concrete rewrites -- don't just say "avoid X", show the fix
- Summarize: total violations found, most frequent category, overall assessment
<success_criteria>
Review is complete when:
- Every flagged violation names the specific pattern and category
- Every flag includes a concrete rewrite, not just a label
- The summary gives a count, identifies the most frequent category, and assesses overall quality
- Zero tolerance -- every pattern match is flagged as a violation, never excused as "single use" or "it works here"
- Co-occurring patterns in a single sentence are the highest-priority flags
</success_criteria>
<reference_index>
| Skill | When to Read |
|---|
/standardizing-prose | Always -- before reviewing |
</reference_index>
