agentsclimarketplace

Humanizer

Skill Agent-Engineer-Master/skill-engineer/operations/humanizer

Shared public skills developed by Skill Engineer

Install
npx -y skills add Agent-Engineer-Master/skill-engineer --skill humanizer

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 6 stars6 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Removes AI writing patterns and injects human quality (specificity, burstiness, precise emotional language) into drafted content. Includes an optional personal-brand mode (voice reference + deterministic eval gate) you can adapt to your own voice. Use when editing drafts so they don't sound like AI. NOT for generating new content, fact-checking, SEO scoring, or research.

SKILL.md

10.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Humanizer: Remove AI Patterns + Inject Human Quality

Full routing notes

Removes AI writing patterns and injects human quality — specificity, burstiness, and precise emotional language. Use when editing drafted content, cleaning up LinkedIn posts, product copy, or blog content so it doesn't sound like AI. Two-phase process: Phase 1 removes 33 AI tells (significance inflation, AI vocabulary, em dash overuse, contrastive negation, vague attributions, soulless structure); Phase 2 injects humanity (sentence length variation, specificity via "what kind?" technique, precise emotional language). An optional personal-brand mode (below) adapts the two phases to a specific author's voice, using a scoreable voice-schema gate and a deterministic eval harness. Do not use for generating new content from scratch, fact-checking, SEO scoring, or research. Does not use humanizer tools (gpthuman.ai, WriteHuman) — those are detectable; this skill does structural rewriting.

Two-phase editing skill. Phase 1 removes AI tells. Phase 2 injects specificity, burstiness, and emotional precision. Clean-but-generic is still a failure — both phases are required.

Setup

Load both reference files before starting:

  1. references/patterns-reference.md — 33 AI tell patterns with before/after examples
  2. references/specificity-techniques.md — "What kind?" technique, 7 levers, Emotions Wheel

Both are mandatory. Do not skip either.


Brand Context Intake

Before editing, identify the context. If not supplied, ask:

"Which context is this for? (a) Personal brand — LinkedIn/X/blog, (b) Analytical deliverable (report/memo/brief), (c) Generic content"

ContextRisk levelQuality gate
Personal brand (LinkedIn/X/blog)HighestUse Personal-brand mode below (voice reference + schema gate + eval harness). Always offer 2 variations. Read-aloud test mandatory. At least one thing only the author could know.
Analytical deliverable (paired with a write-report-style caller before its humanization pass)HighestMatch the register the document already uses — keep analytical clarity, strip generic AI texture. Zero em-dashes. Preserve evidence tags, codes, and cited numbers untouched — relocate, never delete.
Generic contentStandardRun Phase 1 + Phase 2 only. No voice gate.

Personal-brand mode (example — adapt to your own voice)

When the draft is the author's own LinkedIn or X post, this mode wraps the two generic phases with a specific voice and a scoreable gate. It only rewrites an existing draft; generating a post from scratch is out of scope for this skill.

Required inputs: draft and channel (linkedin | x). Ask for either if missing. Optional: purpose, known_context (facts/examples that must be preserved).

Load, in order, before editing:

  1. references/voice-schema.md — a scoreable quality gate template. Fill in the "Banned Vocabulary" / "Forbidden Phrases" / dimension descriptions with the author's own rules, or use it as shipped as a reasonable generic default.
  2. Any voice-reference notes the author already maintains (brand guidelines, prior approved posts, a style doc). If none exist yet, ask 2-3 questions about tone, audience, and what they never say, and note the answers for next time.

Workflow:

  1. Preserve meaning — capture the core claim, audience, concrete facts, personal details, caveats. Mark facts that must not change. If the draft lacks enough factual/personal material to feel author-specific, say so under Residual risks rather than inventing details.
  2. Substance & structure — lead with the point, cut padded intros / fake balance / list symmetry that does not serve the argument. LinkedIn keeps a considered prose rhythm unless clearly tactical; X compresses to one idea per tweet.
  3. Voice & humanize — run Phase 1 + Phase 2 below, then apply the author's voice rules from step 1: precise, direct, evidence-first; confident but not certain; no corporate-polish theater, no generic AI commentary, no fake certainty; no em-dashes if that's one of their rules.
  4. Score & gate — score the output against references/voice-schema.md. When editing files/fixtures, run the deterministic harness:
    python scripts/eval_voice.py fixtures --format markdown
    
    If not run, state that the scorecard is manual-only.
  5. Capture feedback — on approve/reject/manual-edit, save before/after to fixtures/before-after/ (approved), fixtures/aiish/ (rejected), or fixtures/gold/ (strong published). This builds a calibration set over time — don't rely on chat history alone.

Output: Revised Draft (2 variations) · Scorecard (vs schema) · Deterministic-check summary · Change notes · Residual risks · Publishability verdict. Never publish or send on the author's behalf — drafts are review inputs for a human.


Phase 1: Remove AI Tells

Load references/patterns-reference.md. Scan for all 33 patterns. Rewrite each flagged section.

Priority flags (most common, fix first):

  • Em dashes (—): Do a mechanical character search for U+2014 before anything else. Every instance outside a code block must be replaced. This is not optional and not stylistic — em dashes are one of the strongest AI detection signals and must be eliminated completely from prose. Replace with: comma (asides), period (strong breaks), colon (heading label-separators). Zero exceptions outside code blocks.
  • AI tell-words: delve, unpack, leverage, tapestry, landscape, pivotal, comprehensive, robust, seamless, furthermore, moreover, genuine, genuinely, "it's worth noting," "this underscores"
  • 2025-26 cluster (the delve-era words are fading; these replaced them): unlock, elevate, holistic, nuanced, resonate, align, transformative, dynamic, empower, streamline, harness, paramount, meticulous
  • Contrastive negation ("It's not just X, it's Y" / "not merely... but...") — the strongest 2025-26 tell. Delete the negated clause, state the claim directly.
  • Self-answered rhetorical questions ("Why does this matter? Because...") — merge into one declarative
  • Theatrical transitions: "Here's the thing:", "The result?", "Let's break it down:", "But here's the kicker:", "Ultimately,"
  • "Aims to" / "seeks to" openers ("This article aims to explore...") — just start with the claim
  • Fake citations: "research shows," "experts say," "studies suggest" without a named source
  • Significance inflation: "marks a pivotal moment," "enduring testament," "evolving landscape"
  • Copula avoidance: "serves as," "stands as," "functions as" → replace with "is"/"are"
  • Sycophantic artifacts: "Great question!", "I hope this helps!", "Let me know if..."

Phase 2: Inject Human Quality

Load references/specificity-techniques.md. Run all four injection passes:

Pass 1 — Burstiness Find 3+ consecutive sentences of similar length. Break one up or combine two. Target: mix of short punchy sentences (6–8 words) and longer ones. Low burstiness is the strongest AI detection signal.

Pass 2 — Specificity injection For every key claim: ask "what kind?" three times. If the noun or verb can't answer "what kind?", it's not earning its place. Apply the 7 specificity levers (see reference file). Move the content from V1–V2 specificity to V3–V4.

Pass 3 — Emotional precision Find every emotional or evaluative word (good, bad, frustrated, excited, important, effective). Apply the Emotions Wheel: replace with the precise emotion. "I felt bad" → "I felt embarrassed" or "I felt resentful" — each tells a different story.

Pass 4 — Read-aloud test Read the output aloud. Anywhere you stumble or the words feel unnatural in your mouth — fix those. This catches what pattern-matching misses.


Output Format

  1. The rewritten text
  2. Brief change summary: which patterns removed (Phase 1) + which injections made (Phase 2)

For personal brand context: deliver 2 variations unless the user explicitly asks for one.


Rules

  • Load both reference files — mandatory, not optional
  • Em dash search is the first action in Phase 1. Search for (U+2014) before reading for other patterns. Replace every instance outside a code block. Do not proceed until the count is zero.
  • Never deliver Phase 1 only — clean-but-generic is still a failure
  • Never do surface-level word substitution — fix the underlying claim, not just the word
  • Never add chatbot artifacts to output ("Here is the revised text", "I hope this helps")
  • Ask for brand context if not supplied — quality gates differ
  • Personal brand: 2 variations by default
  • When a noun/verb can't answer "what kind?", flag it explicitly — don't silently substitute
  • Humanizer tools (gpthuman.ai etc.) are now detectable — never recommend them

Learning Loop (every run, automatic — do not ask first)

Run at the end of EVERY invocation. These are low-risk reversible writes; do them, then mention them in one line of the output.

  • If the user approves the output — save the before/after pair to fixtures/before-after/ (personal-brand mode) or as an example in references/patterns-reference.md under "Saved Examples" (generic mode)
  • If the user rejects the output as still AI-ish — save it to fixtures/aiish/ and append a dated entry to references/learnings.md (What Has Failed) naming which pattern survived the pass
  • If the user identifies a new pattern — add it to references/patterns-reference.md as the next numbered pattern, same turn
  • If the user says "never do X again" — add it to the Rules section above and note it in the relevant reference file
  • If the user corrects a specific mistake — update the relevant pattern's description to prevent recurrence, and log the correction in references/learnings.md
  • If the run surfaced nothing (clean pass, no user reaction yet) — skip silently; no empty entries

Credits

Phase 1 pattern taxonomy originally based on Wikipedia's "Signs of AI writing" guide via github.com/blader/humanizer (MIT licensed). This version extends it with Phase 2 (specificity/burstiness/emotional-precision injection), a personal-brand mode, and a deterministic eval harness.

<!-- Built with Agent Engineer Master — get your own production-ready skill: www.agentengineermaster.com/skill-engineer -->

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.