Removes common AI-writing tells and rewrites prose to sound natural and human, using an interactive intake, voice calibration, and a second-pass audit.
100
100%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.00xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an excellent skill description that covers all key dimensions thoroughly. It provides specific actions, comprehensive natural trigger terms, clear 'what' and 'when' guidance, and even includes explicit exclusion criteria ('Do NOT use for') that reduce conflict risk. The description is detailed without being padded, and uses appropriate third-person voice throughout.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple concrete actions: remove AI-writing tells, rewrite prose, interactive Q&A intake, voice calibration, applying edits in a repo. Also specifies tools used (AskUserQuestion, Read/Write, WebSearch/WebFetch, Bash) and outputs (rewritten text, edit log). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (remove AI-writing tells, rewrite prose to sound natural/human) and 'when' (explicit trigger terms listed, plus a 'Do NOT use for' section that further clarifies boundaries). The trigger list serves as an explicit 'Use when' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'humanise', 'humanize', 'de-AI', 'sound natural', 'less robotic', 'remove AI tells', 'AI writing', 'chatbot tone', 'voice match'. These are highly natural phrases a user would use when requesting this kind of work. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche — humanizing AI-generated text is a specific task unlikely to conflict with general writing, editing, or coding skills. The trigger terms are very targeted (humanise, de-AI, remove AI tells) and the 'Do NOT use for' section further reduces false positive activation. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
100%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is an excellent skill file that is concise, actionable, and well-structured. It provides a clear multi-phase workflow with explicit validation steps, delegates detailed reference material to linked files, and includes a strong integrated example showing before/after transformation. The non-negotiables section effectively establishes safety boundaries without being verbose.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is lean and efficient throughout. It assumes Claude's competence, avoids explaining what AI writing is or how tools work, and every section earns its place. The anti-patterns list is tight and the example is purposeful rather than padded. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, specific guidance at every step: a clear hunt list reference, specific categories to target (significance inflation, em dash pile-ups, chatbot artifacts), a complete before/after example, and explicit instructions for file operations. The integrated example demonstrates exactly what the output should look like. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Four clearly sequenced phases (Intake → First rewrite → Audit pass → Deliver) with an explicit validation checkpoint in Phase 3 that acts as a feedback loop ('still sounds like a brochure?'). The file workflow includes a confirmation gate before destructive Bash commands. Non-negotiables enforce ordering (intake before rewrite, audit after rewrite). | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a well-structured overview that delegates detailed content to one-level-deep references: interactive-intake rules and ai-tells-and-patterns rules are clearly signaled with relative links. The main file stays focused on process and constraints without inlining the full hunt list or intake protocol. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
Reviewed
Table of Contents