# Deslop

> Review or rewrite existing Chinese, English, or mixed-language prose to remove formulaic AI-slop patterns while preserving facts, intent, stance, register, and author voice. Use when the user explicitly asks to deslop, humanize, remove AI writing patterns or AI 味, 说人话, 别像模板/机器人, make text less AI-generated, or audit a draft for those problems. Do not trigger for generic polishing, proofreading, translation, summarization, fact-checking, or drafting from scratch unless deslop is explicitly requested as a step.

- Skill: `patrick-fu/deslop` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 22 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add patrick-fu/deslop`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/patrick-fu/deslop/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Security
- Author: patrick-fu (https://skillmd.com/u/patrick-fu)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/patrick-fu/deslop

---


# Deslop / 说人话

Edit existing prose so it sounds like a person making deliberate choices in a
specific context, not a model performing “human” style. Preserve truth before
style. A slightly awkward faithful sentence is better than a fluent invention.

This is an editorial skill, not an AI detector. Never assign an AI probability,
promise detector evasion, or treat one word or punctuation mark as proof of
authorship.

## Route the request

Choose one delivery mode:

- **Rewrite** — default. Return one ready-to-use revision.
- **Audit** — only when the user asks to inspect, review, mark, or explain
  problems before rewriting. Report findings; do not silently rewrite.
- **Embedded** — when another workflow needs prose as an intermediate result.
  Return only the final text, without process notes. If ambiguity remains,
  preserve the more conservative source wording instead of guessing.
- **File** — only when the user explicitly asks to edit a file. Modify prose in
  place while preserving protected file regions, then summarize the change.

A user-provided writing sample or an explicitly maintained author preference
layer adds **voice calibration** to any mode. It does not create a separate mode
and never relaxes factual fidelity. Never infer, create, or update a persistent
author profile from the current text.

Choose an edit scope:

- **balanced** — default. Reshape short text freely without deleting unique
  information. In long text, also preserve headings, paragraph roles, and
  argument order. Remove only demonstrably empty scaffolding.
- **in-place** — when the user asks to keep the structure, sentence count, or
  layout. Rewrite within sentences; do not delete, merge, or reorder them.
  If a sentence contains only slop, keep an awkward source-faithful shell or
  the original sentence rather than inventing a concrete object or outcome.
- **rebuild** — only when the user explicitly asks for a substantial rewrite,
  compression, or reorganization. Preserve the semantic ledger even when the
  shape changes.

## Load only the needed references

Always read [fidelity.md](references/fidelity.md). Then load selectively:

- Chinese or Chinese-dominant mixed text:
  [patterns-zh.md](references/patterns-zh.md)
- English or English-dominant mixed text:
  [patterns-en.md](references/patterns-en.md)
- Genre, register, or long-form decisions:
  [scenes.md](references/scenes.md)
- A supplied author sample, explicit voice-matching request, or approved author
  preference layer:
  [voice-calibration.md](references/voice-calibration.md)
- Natural text, quotations, academic/legal/technical prose, or any uncertain
  match: [boundary-cases.md](references/boundary-cases.md)

For mixed-language text, read both language pattern files but judge each phrase
in its local linguistic and technical context.

## Rewrite loop

1. **Read for meaning.** Identify the document’s job, audience, register, and
   the author’s actual position.
2. **Build a silent semantic ledger.** Record protected spans and relationships:
   who did what, to what, when, with what status, evidence, strength, and effect.
   For long text, also note each section’s job and what new claim, evidence, or
   consequence it contributes. If a paragraph only paraphrases an earlier point
   without adding a new fact, action, example, distinction, or consequence, mark
   it as redundant — under `balanced` scope it may be merged or removed; under
   `in-place` it stays.
3. **Find clusters, not tokens.** Look for repeated formulaic structures,
   generic framing, performative transitions, flattened rhythm, and register
   mismatch. Do not rewrite merely because a watched word appears once.
4. **Rewrite toward the scene.** Prefer direct claims, concrete source-backed
   detail, natural sentence boundaries, and an appropriate amount of
   irregularity. Do not manufacture personality.
5. **Run the fidelity pass.** Compare every fact, number, name, attribution,
   relationship, modality, completion state, quotation, term, and protected
   file region against the source. Revert any unsupported change.
6. **Run the residual pass.** Remove remaining high-confidence slop without
   sanding away legitimate voice or genre conventions.
7. **Check the ending.** For long-form prose, test the final paragraphs: if
   deleting the last one or two paragraphs makes the piece stronger, end
   earlier. A final paragraph that only restates the thesis without a new
   consequence, action, or synthesis can be compressed. If the body never
   sustained a large scale (时代、文明、未来、世界、历史), do not let the
   ending escalate to it.
8. **Cold read.** Set the rules aside. Read the revision aloud and ask: where
   does it sound like a person working through a problem, and where does it
   sound like a model completing a writing task? If a passage still feels
   templated after sentence-level repair, the issue is structural — do not
   force personality onto it. In rewrite mode, leave the awkward faithful
   sentence; in audit mode, report the structural finding.
9. **Consider no-op.** If the source is already natural and fit for purpose,
   leave it alone. One weak signal is not enough to justify a rewrite.

## Hard boundaries

- Do not invent facts, examples, citations, dates, measurements, product
  capabilities, feedback, emotions, opinions, or first-person experience.
- Do not turn vague attribution into direct fact, or uncertainty into certainty.
- Do not change the actor, owner, object, direction, completion state, causal
  relationship, comparison, or type of effect.
- Keep quotations, titles, proper names, technical terms, commands, paths,
  identifiers, logs, schemas, and literals exact unless the user explicitly asks
  to edit them.
- In file mode, preserve frontmatter, code blocks, inline code, structured data,
  and link destinations. Edit link labels only when prose editing requires it.
- Treat unsupported claims as source content, not permission to fact-check.
  Preserve their attribution and confidence. In audit mode, note that a source
  is missing; in rewrite mode, do not add one or silently promote the claim.
- Never fetch or infer private voice samples. Use only material the current user
  explicitly supplies for the current task, and do not persist it. A separate
  author preference layer is valid only when the user has explicitly maintained
  it and the current target is in its declared scope.

## Positive target

Aim for prose that:

- says the useful thing without announcing that it is about to say it;
- uses the register the situation calls for, including neutral technical prose;
- varies rhythm when natural, without forced fragments or manufactured punch;
- preserves unusual, specific, defensible details already in the source;
- keeps uncertainty, mixed feelings, asides, repetition, and rough edges when
  they belong to the author;
- can be read aloud without sounding like a presentation script.

“More human” does not mean more casual, more emotional, more first-person, or
less precise. It means less statistically generic and more faithful to the
author, audience, and purpose.

## Output contracts

### Rewrite

Return one recommended revision. Do not show a draft, score, internal ledger,
or self-audit. Add a brief note only when a material ambiguity or fidelity risk
cannot be resolved from the source. In long or mixed-quality text, edit only the
parts that need it and return the rest unchanged.

### Audit

Return only material findings, normally one to five. For each finding include:

- the exact excerpt;
- the pattern and why it matters here;
- the fidelity or register risk, when one exists;
- a concrete editing direction.

Do not flag isolated words without contextual evidence.

If there are no material findings, say so and do not invent issues to fill the
format.

### File

Edit only the requested file. If the final prose is unchanged, do not rewrite
the file. Report the path and a short summary instead of pasting the full file.

### No-op

In rewrite or embedded mode, return the exact input without a preamble. In file
mode, retain the file byte-for-byte and report that no change was needed. In
audit mode, say there are no material findings.