메뉴
Transform polished AI-generated text into authentic human-sounding copy. Use when user wants to "de-slop," "humanize," "de-AI," "make sound human," "add personality to," or "degunk" any AI-written content—emails, LinkedIn posts, marketing copy, etc. Also triggers on requests to make text sound "less robotic," "more natural," or "like a real person wrote it."
The starting point for the Divergent Thinking Tools skill stack — a Paralogy product. Use this guide to determine which skill to use for any given problem. Consult this router FIRST whenever the user needs non-obvious thinking of any kind — whether they're a scientist exploring a research question, a CEO facing a strategic decision, a founder building a product, a creator developing an idea, an engineer designing a system, a policymaker crafting legislation, or anyone stuck on a problem where the obvious answers aren't good enough. These tools work on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research — wherever the default thinking feels too safe, too convergent, or too similar to what everyone else would say. Don't wait for the user to say "brainstorm" — if the situation calls for thinking that goes beyond the probable, start here.
Generate questions, not answers. Use when the user needs to reframe a problem, explore a space they don't fully understand, challenge assumptions in an industry or process, or find the door that better ideas could walk through. Triggers on "what questions should I be asking," "what am I not seeing," "help me think about this differently," "what would a beginner ask," or any moment where the user is stuck not because they lack solutions but because they're asking the wrong questions. Also use when a problem space feels stale, when experts have been working on something for years without progress, when an industry or field does things "because that's how it's done," or when the user says "I don't even know what to ask." Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This skill produces questions that open doors. Other skills walk through them.
Force genuinely divergent ideation using Guilford's five-dimension framework, backed by empirical research from Nature Communications (LiveIdeaBench). Use when generating ideas, exploring approaches, developing hypotheses, finding angles, designing solutions, or any task where the user needs multiple genuinely different options — not surface variations of the same thought. Triggers on "brainstorm," "give me ideas," "what are my options," "explore possibilities," "think broadly," "what else could this be," "I need approaches," or any request for a list of options. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. Use INSTEAD of generic list-making. The difference between this skill and a normal brainstorm is the difference between asking five people in the same room and asking five people in different buildings.
Strip rich briefs down to their raw human desire before ideating, forcing AI to generate from internal associations rather than anchoring on provided details. Use BEFORE any brainstorming, ideation, or generation when the user has provided a detailed brief, background context, multiple constraints, or a long description of what they want. Triggers when you notice yourself about to rephrase the user's own words back to them as "ideas," when a prompt contains more than 2-3 sentences of context, or when the user says "I keep getting back what I put in," "the ideas just restate my brief," or "give me something I haven't already thought of." Also use when output from other skills feels anchored or overly shaped by the input. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research — wherever professional language is anchoring the output.
Check whether you're solving the right problem before generating solutions. Use BEFORE any ideation when the problem as stated feels stuck, when every solution feels inadequate, when the obvious answers have already been tried and failed, or when a problem has persisted despite smart people working on it. Triggers on "we've tried everything," "nothing is working," "we keep solving this but it comes back," "I feel like we're missing something," "why can't we fix this," or any moment where the quality of available solutions seems suspiciously low for the amount of effort being applied. If every solution to a problem feels mediocre, the problem might be wrong. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. Also use as a pre-check before any expensive brainstorm — five minutes confirming you're solving the right problem is cheaper than two hours generating brilliant answers to the wrong one.
Post-generation diversity audit that scores whether a set of ideas are actually different from each other or just surface variations of the same thought. Use AFTER any brainstorming, ideation, or creative generation — from any source, any skill, any person — when you need to know if your "ten different ideas" are actually ten ideas or three ideas wearing costumes. Triggers on "are these actually different," "these all feel the same," "did I just write the same idea five times," "check these for diversity," "which of these overlap," or any moment after generating a list where the user wants to know what they actually have before moving forward. Also use automatically as a quality gate after any other creative skill produces output, or when a user pastes in a list of ideas from anywhere and wants them audited. Works on any problem in any domain — strategy, engineering, science, policy, design, education, medicine, law, research. This is the bullshit detector for brainstorms.
| name | de-slop |
| description | Transform polished AI-generated text into authentic human-sounding copy. Use when user wants to "de-slop," "humanize," "de-AI," "make sound human," "add personality to," or "degunk" any AI-written content—emails, LinkedIn posts, marketing copy, etc. Also triggers on requests to make text sound "less robotic," "more natural," or "like a real person wrote it." |
Transform sterile AI output into text that reads like it was written by a real person—someone with deadlines, coffee stains, and a working knowledge of when to break grammar rules.
AI text fails the human test not because it's wrong but because it's too right. Real humans:
Ask for intensity level and context. Present the options, then pause with a bold question so the user knows it's their turn:
Which level, and where is this going? (Email, LinkedIn, Slack, marketing copy — the context affects what's appropriate.)
Do not proceed until the user answers. Do not default to Medium. The choice is theirs.
Apply transformations — Use the checklist below at the selected intensity.
Show before/after — Present the original and transformed version for comparison.
Apply these in order, calibrated to the selected intensity level.
Kill on sight:
Banned openers:
Banned structures:
Glib colon phrases (kill all):
Dramatic single-sentence paragraphs: AI loves these. For emphasis. Over and over. Stop it.
Also kill:
Banned openers:
Break parallelism (occasionally):
Add sentence fragments. For emphasis. Like this.
Start sentences with "And" or "But" — real writers do this constantly.
Kill the wrap-up bow:
Interrupt yourself:
Reduce em-dashes — AI overuses these — like crazy — stop it
Inconsistent Oxford comma:
Imperfect ellipses:
Spacing artifacts:
Grammar "mistakes" that pass spellcheck:
Common typos:
Abbreviation chaos:
Filler injection:
Softeners:
Casual transitions:
Real writing has varying levels of effort:
Light (professional but warm):
Medium (casual professional):
Heavy (stressed middle manager at 11pm):
AI Original: "I wanted to reach out regarding the Q3 marketing strategy. After diving into the data, it's worth noting that our comprehensive approach has yielded robust results. Moving forward, I believe we should leverage these insights to navigate the evolving landscape. Let me know your thoughts."
Humanized (Medium): "Hey—wanted to loop you in on Q3 marketing stuff. Looked at the numbers and honestly the results are solid. Think we should use what we learned here as things keep shifting. lmk what you think"
Humanized (Heavy): "hey quick note on Q3 marketing. looked at the data and its actually pretty solid?? think we shoudl use this going forward, the whole space is shifting anyway so. lmk ur thoughts when you get a sec"
