Claude-code-minoan stop-slop

Strip AI writing patterns from prose across five registers — casual, professional, academic, technical, and narrative. Applies 200+ pattern rules to eliminate predictable LLM tells. Triggers on clean up writing, remove AI slop, edit prose, make this sound less AI.

install

source · Clone the upstream repo

git clone https://github.com/tdimino/claude-code-minoan

Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/

T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/tdimino/claude-code-minoan "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/core-development/stop-slop" ~/.claude/skills/tdimino-claude-code-minoan-stop-slop && rm -rf "$T"

manifest: skills/core-development/stop-slop/SKILL.md

source content

Stop Slop

Eliminate predictable AI writing patterns. Produce clear, specific, human-sounding prose across any register.

Step 1: Detect register

Infer the register from context before applying rules. Different registers tolerate different patterns.

Signal	Register
Citations, methodology, "we hypothesize"	`academic`
API docs, READMEs, changelogs, error messages	`technical`
Fiction, essays, memoir, creative nonfiction	`narrative`
Blog posts, social media, emails	`casual`
Reports, proposals, business comms	`professional`

If the user specifies a register, use it. See references/registers.md for per-register acceptable vs. flagged patterns.

Step 2: Remove slop

Apply these rules, adjusted for register:

Cut filler phrases and AI vocabulary. Remove throat-clearing openers, chatbot artifacts, significance inflation, and words that appear 100-1,000x more in LLM output than human text. See references/phrases.md.
Break formulaic structures. Avoid binary contrasts, dramatic fragmentation, format slop, synonym cycling, rule-of-three overuse, and generic conclusions. See references/structures.md.
Use simple constructions. Prefer "is" over "serves as." Prefer "has" over "boasts." Prefer "use" over "leverage." Active voice. Positive form.
Be specific. Replace vague claims with dates, names, numbers, sources. "Significant improvement" becomes "latency dropped from 340ms to 90ms."
Vary rhythm. Mix sentence lengths. Two items in a list beat three. End paragraphs differently from each other.
Trust readers. State facts. Skip softening, justification, hand-holding. If a metaphor needs explaining, rewrite the metaphor.
Have a voice. React to facts, don't just report them. Acknowledge complexity. Let personality through.

See references/positive.md for what good writing does (not just what to avoid).

Step 3: Score

Rate 1-10 on each dimension, adjusted for register:

Dimension	Question
Directness	Statements or announcements?
Rhythm	Varied or metronomic?
Trust	Respects reader intelligence?
Authenticity	Sounds human, not generated?
Density	Anything cuttable?
Specificity	Claims backed by evidence?

Below 42/60: revise.

Register adjustments (see references/registers.md):

```
academic
```
: Do not penalize precise hedging or longer qualified sentences
```
technical
```
: Consistent structure in reference docs is not a rhythm flaw
```
narrative
```
: Indirection and dramatic rhythm variation are valid techniques

Quick checks

Before delivering prose:

Three consecutive sentences match length? Break one.
Paragraph ends with punchy one-liner? Vary it.
Em-dash before a reveal? Remove it.
Explaining a metaphor? Trust it to land.
"Serves as," "stands as," "represents"? Rewrite with "is."
-ing clause at end of sentence adding no information? Delete it.
Three-item list? Try two items or one.
Different words for the same thing in adjacent sentences? Pick one term and reuse it.

Reference files

File	Purpose
phrases.md	Words and phrases to cut or replace
structures.md	Structural patterns to avoid
positive.md	What good writing does
registers.md	Per-register rules and tolerances
examples.md	Before/after transformations (all registers)

License

MIT