Check sentence

Skill tejask0/agent-skills/check-sentence

A collection of reusable AI agent skills for everyday use.

Install

npx -y skills add tejask0/agent-skills --skill check-sentence

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

2 things to look at

20 days oldThe repository was created 20 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
0 stars0 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

Check a sentence, phrase, or short passage for grammatical and semantic errors, verify it is the correct way of expressing the idea in modern English, and suggest a few alternative ways of saying the same thing. Trigger whenever the user says things like "check this sentence", "is this correct English", "check my grammar", "is this the right way to say it", "grammatically correct?", "check if this sounds right", "fix my sentence", or pastes a sentence/phrase and asks if it's fine, correct, or proper. Also trigger when the user shares something they wrote and wants quick language validation — even if they don't use the word "grammar". Do NOT trigger for creative writing or when the user explicitly wants a full rewrite.

SKILL.md

7.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Check Sentence Skill

Purpose

Validate a sentence or phrase for grammatical correctness, semantic accuracy, and modern English usage. Fix errors with minimal intervention — preserve the user's original wording as much as possible. Then offer a few alternative phrasings that express the same idea more naturally, concisely, or effectively — written as a human would write them, not as AI generates them.

Behavior

Step 1 — Read the input

Accept a sentence, phrase, or short passage from the user (can be casual, formal, written, or spoken-style text).

Step 2 — Check for

Grammar errors: subject-verb agreement, tense, articles (a/an/the), prepositions, pluralization, punctuation
Semantic errors: words that are used incorrectly or don't mean what the user intends
Naturalness: is this how a native speaker would say it in modern English? (Flag if something is technically correct but sounds odd or outdated)
Register mismatch: is the formality level consistent? (e.g. mixing slang with formal phrasing)

Step 3 — Output format

If the sentence is correct:

✅ Correct. Nothing to fix.

Optionally add one line if there's a minor nuance worth noting (e.g. subtle register note). Keep it brief.

If the sentence has errors:

❌ [Corrected sentence]

What changed: [Short, plain-English list of fixes — one line each, no jargon]

Always follow with alternatives (whether or not there were errors):

Alternatives:

[Option 1]

[Option 2]

[Option 3 — optional, only if genuinely different]

Each alternative must express the same core meaning. Label register/quality briefly if the difference isn't obvious. Aim for 2–3 alternatives; skip only if the original is already so idiomatic that no useful alternative exists.

Step 4 — Full corrected passage (always include, multi-sentence input only)

If the input is a passage (more than one sentence/paragraph — not a single short sentence or phrase), end the response with the complete corrected version, as one clean block, with no per-sentence breakdown mixed in, no ✅/❌ markers, no "what changed" notes, and no commentary before or after it. This is the copy-paste-ready version: only the corrections from Step 3 applied, nothing else rewritten or improved beyond that.

Format it like this, as the last thing in the response:

Full corrected version:

[entire passage, corrected, ready to copy-paste]

For a single sentence/phrase input, skip this step — the corrected sentence in Step 3 already serves that purpose.

Rules for Alternatives — Anti-Slop

Alternatives must sound like a human wrote them. Before writing each one, run it through the checks below. If it fails any, rewrite it.

Read references/slop-phrases.md and references/slop-structures.md for full lists. The key rules:

What to cut

No throat-clearing openers: "Here's the thing", "The truth is", "It turns out", "At its core"
No adverbs: Kill all -ly words. No "really", "genuinely", "deeply", "fundamentally", "truly"
No em dashes: Use commas or periods instead
No vague declaratives: If a sentence says something is important without naming the specific thing, rewrite it
No filler phrases: "At the end of the day", "When it comes to", "In today's world", "It's worth noting"

What to avoid structurally

No binary contrasts: Don't write "Not X. It's Y." — state Y directly
No dramatic fragmentation: No staccato one-liners stacked for fake profundity
No rhetorical setups: "What if...?", "Think about it:", "Here's what I mean:"
No negative listings: Don't list what it isn't before saying what it is
No passive voice: Every sentence needs a human subject doing something
No narrator-from-a-distance: "People tend to..." → use "you"
No false agency: Inanimate things don't perform human actions ("the culture shifts", "the data tells us")
No three-item lists by default: Two items usually beat three
No uniform rhythm: Vary sentence length. Don't end every alternative the same way

What to do instead

Lead with a subject doing something
Be specific — name the exact thing
Vary sentence structure across the alternatives (don't make them all parallel constructions)
Put the reader in the scene where possible ("you" beats "people")
Trust the reader — no hand-holding, no softening, no justification

Quick self-check before writing each alternative

Any adverbs? Kill them.
Any passive voice? Find the actor, make them the subject.
Any em dashes? Remove. Use commas or a period.
Three consecutive sentences same length? Break one.
Sounds like a LinkedIn pull-quote? Rewrite it.
Starts with a Wh- word (What/When/Where/Why/How)? Restructure — lead with the subject.
Any "not X, it's Y" contrast? State Y directly, drop the negation.

Rules for Corrections

Never change wording unless it is wrong. If a word is correct but informal, note it — don't replace it.
Never rewrite the sentence into something the user didn't intend. The correction must preserve intent; the alternatives may reframe.
Minimal output — no long explanations. The user wants a fast check, not a grammar lesson. One short line per fix max.
If there's ambiguity about intent (a phrase could mean two things), flag it briefly before giving alternatives.
For non-native English speakers: be forgiving about minor stylistic things that are technically fine.

Examples

Input: "He don't know nothing about it."

❌ He doesn't know anything about it.

What changed: don't → doesn't (subject-verb agreement); double negative corrected.

Alternatives:

He has no idea about it. (conversational)

He's in the dark on this. (idiomatic)

Input: "I am working since 3 hours."

❌ I have been working for 3 hours.

What changed: Tense: ongoing action requires present perfect continuous; since → for (use for with a duration, since with a point in time).

Alternatives:

Three hours in and still going. (punchy, informal)

I've been at this for three hours. (casual, natural)

Input: "The informations are incorrect."

❌ The information is incorrect.

What changed: information is uncountable — no plural; verb adjusted to match.

Alternatives:

This information is wrong. (shorter, direct)

These details are off. (if referring to multiple specific items)

Input (multi-sentence passage): "He don't know nothing about it. He is working since 3 hours on it."

❌ He doesn't know anything about it.

What changed: don't → doesn't (subject-verb agreement); double negative corrected.

❌ He has been working on it for 3 hours.

What changed: Tense: ongoing action requires present perfect continuous; since → for.

Alternatives:

He's clueless about it, three hours in and counting. (combines both, informal)

Full corrected version:

He doesn't know anything about it. He has been working on it for 3 hours.