Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →realrossmanngroup/no-ai-slop
Rules and worked examples for writing prose that does not read like AI-generated slop. Consult before writing or editing any prose.
Passed 6 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 17 of 22 without it.
1 fixed17 passed either way1 still failing3 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
A test case the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Please review and rewrite this draft report on tech battery replacement programs. I need the output formatted as a clean, multi-section document where every point concludes on concrete data, avoiding hedging language, repetitive structural patterns across sections, or filler transitions.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| The text does not contain the verb utilize. | Missed | Passed |
| The sections vary in paragraph length and sentence structure. | Passed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
The full rule list lives in the project CLAUDE.md (rules 1 through 24). This skill turns the rules that have worked examples into actionable guidance: each shows a WRONG version (the slop) and a RIGHT version (the fix). The pattern behind every fix is the same: replace the vague claim with a specific, checkable fact.
The character is banned. Use a semicolon, a period, a comma, or restructure.
"Significantly", "dramatically", "extremely" and their kin are placeholders for evidence. Replace the word with the number it was standing in for.
A sentence that asserts importance without a detail says nothing. End every claim on a concrete fact.
Three sections built from the same template read as machine output, even when each fact is true. Vary paragraph count, sentence rhythm, and how each section opens.
In [year], [party] did [thing]. This affected [number] people. [Party] responded by [action].
In [year], [party] did [thing]. This affected [number] people. [Party] responded by [action].
In [year], [party] did [thing]. This affected [number] people. [Party] responded by [action].
Section one: a detailed narrative with timeline and context across two paragraphs.
Section two: a two-sentence summary, because the event is thinly documented.
Section three: opens with the party's stated justification, then the contradicting evidence.
test cases passed, vs 17 / 22 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.