| name | de-ai-writing |
| description | Use when the user wants writing to feel less AI-generated, more human, more lived-in, or more like something a real person would actually say. Trigger for Chinese long-form articles, blog rewrites,公众号文案, personal essays, narrative posts, or any request mentioning 去AI味、像真人写、有人味、别太机器、别太模板化、公众号成稿. |
De-AI Writing
This skill removes the specific signals that make writing feel generated, over-smoothed, or template-driven.
The goal is not to make writing messy. The goal is to make it sound owned.
When to Use
Use this skill when the user asks for any of the following:
- “去 AI 味”
- “像真人写”
- “有人味一点”
- “不要那么像模型生成”
- “不要太模板化”
- “像人在讲，不像在总结”
Also use it when the draft shows obvious generated-writing symptoms even if the user does not name them directly.
For public-account articles, use this skill both to remove AI flavor and to finish the piece into something that reads like a publishable Chinese公众号 draft.
Core Rule
Do not merely paraphrase.
Rewrite from the point of view of a person who has actually lived through the thing being described.
That means:
- preserve the user’s meaning
- preserve useful structure
- remove visible generation artifacts
- restore judgment, friction, uncertainty, and narrative continuity
Process
1. Diagnose Before Rewriting
Scan the draft for high-probability AI flavor:
- generic opening that could fit any article
- abstract labels repeated without new information
- tidy framework voice replacing lived narration
- prompt/tutorial/checklist residue
- over-explaining obvious points
- repeated adjacent restatements
- too many choppy short sentences
- emotion that feels declared rather than earned
If several of these appear, rewrite at paragraph level rather than sentence level.
2. Decide the Proper Voice
Pick the strongest human mode for the piece:
- retelling voice: “this is what happened, this is what I thought then”
- reflection voice: “I used to think X, later I realized Y”
- judgment voice: “this works, this doesn’t, here’s why”
- confessional voice: “I was unsure, embarrassed, cautious, or wrong”
Prefer one dominant mode. Do not mix all four unless the piece truly needs it.
3. Rewrite Toward Ownership
During rewrite:
- replace framework language with remembered experience
- keep concrete stakes over abstract summaries
- merge overly short sentences that break flow without adding force
- keep some edges; not every paragraph needs a polished lesson
- let the narrator sound like someone talking after having gone through it
Short sentences are allowed, but only when they create real emphasis.
4. Remove Generated Scaffolding
Delete or compress:
- obvious “核心是 / 本质上 / 关键在于 / 说白了” repetition
- formulaic transitions that do not move the thought forward
- explicit prompt artifacts
- “how-to” explanation when the paragraph should be narrative
- symmetrical list-like prose unless the content truly is list-shaped
If a paragraph sounds like it is trying to prove it is well-written, simplify it.
5. Preserve Human Structure
Strong Chinese long-form writing often feels human not because the words are fancy, but because the structure feels lived rather than assembled.
When revising:
- let one paragraph carry one main movement of thought
- do not collapse a full emotional or logical turn into one dense block
- if the narrator changes direction, add a bridge sentence explaining why
- make past projects or past attempts do real work: each one should reveal a limit, not just provide credentials
- alternate between concrete experience and interpretation instead of stacking abstractions
- keep some breathing room after dense technical or judgment-heavy paragraphs
For experience-sharing posts, a useful rhythm is:
- what I did before
- what each experience taught me could not work
- why that pushed me to change direction
- what I did next
6. Final Human Check
Before delivering, silently test:
- Does this sound like something the person would actually say out loud?
- Does the emotion come from the situation instead of adjectives?
- Is the rhythm natural, or is it chopped up for effect?
- Did I keep only one strongest version of each point?
- If a reader removed all headings, would the prose still feel human?
If not, rewrite again.
Public Account Finishing Mode
Use this mode when the target output is a Chinese public-account article, newsletter-style long post, or founder/personal-brand article meant to be read top-to-bottom.
The job here is not just “remove AI flavor.” The job is to make the piece feel publishable.
What good public-account finishing looks like
- the title is direct and human, not SEO sludge and not empty clickbait
- the opening establishes tension within the first 2-4 paragraphs
- the rhythm is readable on mobile, with paragraphs that breathe
- subheads help orientation but do not read like a consulting deck
- the piece has escalation: context -> friction -> turn -> method -> reflection
- the ending lands emotionally instead of fading into generic encouragement
Rewrite rules for public-account mode
- compress over-explained logic into cleaner narrative flow
- keep headings, but make them sound spoken rather than “frameworked”
- remove “summary after every paragraph” habits
- keep useful repetition only when it builds emotional or rhetorical force
- favor medium-length paragraphs over sentence fragments
- let the opening hook a reader, not just introduce a topic
- make the final section feel earned; avoid generic uplift
- keep paragraph breaks generous enough for mobile reading; do not merge everything into giant walls
- preserve explicit bridge paragraphs when the narrator changes career direction, product direction, or point of view
- if a “personal IP / trust” section exists, explain the trust-building mechanism, not just the slogan
Default structure for public-account mode
If the user did not provide a required template, prefer this progression:
- title with a concrete claim or tension
- opening with discomfort, contradiction, or surprise
- identity/context section: who I am and why this mattered
- turning point: what changed in how I saw the problem
- main body: what happened and what I learned
- closing reflection: what this means now
Do not force this structure if the user has already provided a better one.
Experience-Sharing Post Mode
For Chinese experience-sharing posts, especially those about创业、接单、职业转向、技术商业化:
- let the opening create pressure before explanation
- use earlier projects as evidence, but make each one end with a revealed limitation
- add a direct transition when the narrator changes track: “because of those experiences, I moved from X to Y”
- say practical motives plainly when they matter, such as周期、现金流、验证速度、回款速度
- treat “personal IP” as a trust system: what the narrator publishes, how often, what a new reader learns, why that changes buying confidence
- keep the strongest “I realized…” moments, especially first encounters with doubt, mismatch, or changed judgment
This mode should feel like a person looking back and connecting the dots, not like a model arranging lessons into a clean deck.
Output Style
Default output:
- provide the revised version directly
- do not over-explain the rewrite unless the user asks
- if useful, add a very short note on 2-4 principles you applied
Do not return a lecture on writing theory unless requested.
Read Next
