humanizer

name	humanizer
description	Use when cleaning AI-writing tells out of a commit body, CHANGELOG entry, issue/PR, or doc. Strips slop; keeps TAOM's em-dash/boldface house style.
allowed-tools	["Read","Write","Edit","Grep","Glob","AskUserQuestion"]

/humanizer — Strip AI-Writing Tells From Prose

Rewrite a piece of prose so it reads as deliberate human writing instead of generic LLM output. Ported from blader/humanizer (MIT), whose pattern list derives from Wikipedia's Signs of AI writing. Adapted for TAOM: the em-dash / boldface / inline-header patterns are carved out because TAOM uses them deliberately (see the carve-out below).

The everyday, always-on form of this discipline is .claude/rules/ai-prose-style.md (a short always-load rule that keeps the worst tells out of new prose as you write it). This skill is the deep-clean tool — invoke it to pass an already-written artifact through the full pattern list.

Core insight

"LLMs use statistical algorithms to guess what should come next. The result tends toward the most statistically likely result that applies to the widest variety of cases."

That bias is the source of every pattern below: text drifts toward generic, broadly-applicable phrasing. The fix is almost always more specific and more concrete, not more "polished."

The diagnostic strength is in clusters, not isolated instances. One em-dash or one formal word is not AI slop. A paragraph stacking significance inflation + vague attribution + rule-of-three + a generic conclusion is.

When to use

• Cleaning a feature doc, RCA, or README before it ships
• Tightening a long GitHub issue / PR body
• A commit body or CHANGELOG narrative that reads like marketing copy
• The user hands you a block of AI-generated text and asks to humanize it
• Voice-matching: the user provides a writing sample and wants the rewrite in their voice

For day-to-day writing, you don't need to invoke this — ai-prose-style.md already governs new prose. Reach for the skill when you want a thorough, pattern-by-pattern pass over a finished artifact.

TAOM house-style carve-out (READ FIRST)

TAOM's knowledge base uses several "AI tells" as deliberate semantic markers. Do NOT strip these, and do NOT mass-rewrite existing docs to remove them:

Upstream pattern	TAOM disposition	Why
#14 em/en dashes	KEEP	~4,340 across CHANGELOG + docs. They mark findings and causal breaks; they're structural to the analytical style.
#15 boldface	KEEP	Status / finding / constraint markers (**Status: BUILT**, **Correct fix:**). Semantic, not ornamental.
#16 inline-**Label:** lists	KEEP	The data-dense bullet format TAOM docs rely on.
markdown tables, backticked paths/code	KEEP	Core to every TAOM doc.
#17 Title Case headings	n/a	TAOM already uses sentence case, so this rule is a no-op here.

Everything else in the list below applies. The skill removes slop without touching TAOM's visual-hierarchy conventions.

Workflow

1. Identify the patterns present (scan against the table). Note clusters, not lone instances.
2. Rewrite, don't delete — replace each AI construction with a concrete, natural alternative. Preserve the original scope, depth, and every load-bearing fact.
3. Preserve meaning — the rewrite must say everything the original said. Humanizing is not summarizing.
4. Match the voice — fit the artifact's register (a commit body, an RCA, and a README have different voices). Add personality only where the content wants it; a build-error note doesn't.

Voice calibration

When the user provides a writing sample (inline or a file path):

• Note sentence-length rhythm, vocabulary level, how paragraphs open, punctuation habits, recurring phrasings, and how they transition between ideas.
• Match the rewrite to those patterns instead of producing generic "clean" output.

Without a sample, default to natural, varied, opinionated prose appropriate to the artifact type.

Audit pass (the second rewrite)

After the first-draft rewrite:

1. Ask yourself: "What makes the text below still read as obviously AI-generated?" Answer briefly — list the remaining tells.
2. Produce a final version that addresses each one.
3. Present: the draft, the bullets of remaining tells, and the final rewrite. Offer a short summary of what changed if it's a large edit.

(The upstream's "zero em/en dashes" hard constraint in this pass is dropped for TAOM — em-dashes are carved out.)

What NOT to flag (over-editing protection)

These are not AI tells. Leave them alone:

• Perfect grammar or consistent style on their own
• Mixed casual / formal registers
• Formal or academic vocabulary used correctly
• A lone em-dash, a single transition word, or one short emphatic sentence
• An unsourced claim that has no other clustering tells

Preserve these human signals where they exist: specific hard-to-fabricate detail; mixed feelings and unresolved tension; dated references tied to an era or subculture; genuine asides and self-corrections; varied sentence length.

The 33 patterns

Content

#	Pattern	Before → After
1	Significance inflation	"marking a pivotal moment in the evolution of…" → "was established in 1989 to collect regional statistics"
2	Notability name-dropping	"cited in NYT, BBC, FT, and The Hindu" → "In a 2024 NYT interview, she argued…"
3	Superficial -ing analyses	"symbolizing… reflecting… showcasing…" → remove or expand with actual sources
4	Promotional language	"nestled within the breathtaking region" → "is a town in the Gonder region"
5	Vague attributions	"Experts believe it plays a crucial role" → "according to a 2019 survey by…"
6	Formulaic challenges	"Despite challenges… continues to thrive" → specific facts about the actual challenges

Language

#	Pattern	Before → After
7	AI vocabulary	"testament… landscape… showcasing… additionally" → "also… remain common"
8	Copula avoidance	"serves as… features… boasts" → "is… has"
9	Negative parallelisms / tailing negations	"It's not just X, it's Y", "…, no guessing" → state the point directly
10	Rule of three	"innovation, inspiration, and insights" → use the natural number of items
11	Synonym cycling	"protagonist… main character… central figure… hero" → "protagonist" (repeat when clearest)
12	False ranges	"from the Big Bang to dark matter" → list the topics directly
13	Passive voice / subjectless fragments	"No configuration file needed" → name the actor when it aids clarity

Style

#	Pattern	Before → After
14	Em/en dashes	TAOM EXCEPTION — KEEP. Upstream cuts them all; TAOM uses them deliberately.
15	Boldface overuse	TAOM EXCEPTION — KEEP. Semantic status/finding markers.
16	Inline-header lists (**Label:**)	TAOM EXCEPTION — KEEP. Data-dense format.
17	Title Case headings	"Strategic Negotiations And Partnerships" → "Strategic negotiations and partnerships" (TAOM already does this)
18	Emojis	"🚀 Launch Phase: 💡 Key Insight:" → remove
19	Curly quotes	smart quotes → straight quotes
26	Hyphenated word pairs	"cross-functional, data-driven, client-facing" → drop hyphens on common pairs
27	Persuasive authority tropes	"At its core, what matters is…" → state the point directly
28	Signposting announcements	"Let's dive in", "Here's what you need to know" → start with the content
29	Fragmented headers	"## Performance" + "Speed matters." → let the heading do the work
30	Diff-anchored writing	"This function was added to replace…" → describe what it does, not what changed
31	Manufactured punchlines / staccato drama	"It had no preference. No prior. No nostalgia." → varied sentence lengths, concrete claims
32	Aphorism formulas	"Symmetry is the language of trust" → replace the formula with the actual claim
33	Conversational rhetorical openers	"Honestly? It depends…" → remove the fake-candid setup

Communication

#	Pattern	Before → After
20	Chatbot artifacts	"I hope this helps! Let me know if…" / offer-to-continue closers → remove
21	Cutoff / speculative gap-filling	"While details are limited in available sources…", "maintains a low profile" → find sources or remove
22	Sycophantic tone	"Great question! You're absolutely right!" → respond directly (see response-style.md Rule 1)

Filler and hedging

#	Pattern	Before → After
23	Filler phrases	"In order to", "Due to the fact that" → "To", "Because"
24	Excessive hedging	"could potentially possibly" → "may"
25	Generic conclusions	"The future looks bright" → specific plans or facts

Relationship to other rules

• .claude/rules/ai-prose-style.md — the always-load companion: the high-value subset of this list applied automatically to new prose. This skill is the on-demand deep-clean.
• .claude/rules/response-style.md — owns reply openings + confidence tags + the anti-sycophancy reflex (pattern #22). Don't duplicate that here; it governs chat replies, this governs produced artifacts.
• .claude/rules/evidence-over-claims.md §C — never invent the "facts" you write into a humanized doc.

Source

Ported from blader/humanizer (MIT license), version 2.8.0, whose 33-pattern catalogue is drawn from Wikipedia's Signs of AI writing (WikiProject AI Cleanup). TAOM adaptations: dropped upstream version:/compatibility:/license: frontmatter (not Claude Code fields); carved out em-dashes (#14), boldface (#15), and inline-headers (#16) as deliberate TAOM conventions; removed the "zero em-dashes" hard constraint from the audit pass; pointed sycophancy (#22) at response-style.md to avoid duplication.