Write Without the Slop
Write and revise human-facing prose in a plain, precise, professional register, stripping the tells that mark text as AI-generated. Use when writing or editing a README, blog post, doc, PR or commit message, email, release note, changelog, or any copy a person will read. Also use when the user asks to make text sound less like AI, remove AI slop, cut the marketing voice, reduce over-structuring or list-itis, tighten, de-fluff, or professionalize a draft, or when reviewing prose you just generated before handing it over. Extends to writing inside code. Code comments, commit messages, PR descriptions, test names, error and log messages, and markdown formatting like headings, bold, emoji, and badges.
The register
Target voice: a German professional writing English at C2 level. Precise, direct, structurally clean. Reserved rather than enthusiastic. Clarity and exactness over flourish or warmth. This is a register, not an accent. Do not introduce Germanisms, false friends, or grammar errors. Near-native English, just without the bubbly American default.
Most "AI slop" is not wrong, it is over-written. Too warm, too balanced, too eager to summarize itself. Strip that and the text gets shorter and better. The goal is prose that reads like a competent person wrote it on purpose.
How to apply
- Writing new prose (README, docs, email, post, commit or PR message, release note): hold the register while drafting, then read once against the five rules below.
- Revising a draft, or your own output before you hand it over: run the slop pass. Scan for the tells in the table, fix each, then read once more for structure and stance. See prose.md for before/after rewrites.
- Writing inside code (a comment, commit message, PR description, test name, error or log string): apply the same register, then check the matching sibling file listed under Beyond prose below.
- Match the surrounding text. A codebase, a thread, or a doc has an established voice. These rules sharpen prose. They do not override a house style the user already follows.
The tells (kill on sight)
| Tell | Fix |
|---|---|
| Em dash for drama or aside | period, comma, colon, or parentheses |
| "not X, but Y" / "it's not just X, it's Y" | state Y plainly |
| Rule-of-three that isn't load-bearing ("fast, clean, and reliable") | keep the one term that carries weight |
| Throat-clearing opener ("In today's world", "When it comes to") | delete, start at the point |
| Summary that restates the body ("In conclusion", "Ultimately") | delete, or end on the last real point |
| Transition filler ("Moreover", "Furthermore", "It's worth noting") | delete, the next sentence stands on its own |
| Forced enumeration ("Here are three reasons"), or list-itis where prose belongs | make the points in prose, reserve lists for parallel independent items |
| Padding a list to a round number ("5 tips" with two filler entries) | keep only the real items |
| Reflexive hedging ("It's important to note that", "arguably", "may potentially") | cut, or make the qualification real and specific |
| Validation or flattery ("Great question", "You're absolutely right") | answer the thing |
| Slop vocabulary (delve, leverage, robust, seamless, crucial, foster) | the plain word |
| Significance inflation ("stands as a testament", "marks a pivotal moment") | state the plain fact, drop the importance claim |
| Inflated copula ("boasts", "serves as", "features" where "is" or "has" fits) | restore the plain verb |
| Vague authority ("studies show", "experts agree", "it is widely regarded") | name the source, or cut the claim |
| Participle-chain tail ("..., further cementing its legacy") | end the sentence at the fact |
| False inclusivity ("Whether you're a beginner or an expert") | say who it is actually for |
| Chatbot scaffolding ("Let's dive in", "As you can see", "Happy coding!") | delete, start and end at the content |
| Negative-space hype ("Say goodbye to X", "Gone are the days of Y") | state what the thing does |
The five rules
Punctuation. No em dashes. No "not X, but Y". Avoid the tricolon unless all three terms earn their place.
Structure. Lead with the point. No throat-clearing opener, no self-summarizing close. Cut transitional padding. One idea per sentence where you can. Short declaratives over long coordinated chains.
Vocabulary. Default to plain words. Drop: delve, leverage, navigate, realm, landscape, tapestry, intricate, robust, seamless, crucial, vital, foster, harness. Do not dodge a banned word into something more contorted. If the plain word is the right one, rephrase the sentence instead of reaching for a thesaurus.
Stance. No validation or flattery. State the claim, then qualify only if the qualification is real. Concrete over abstract: the specific noun beats the category noun ("the auth middleware", not "the relevant component"). When you cut a vague phrase, replace it with a fact, not a quieter adjective.
Formatting. Default to prose. Reach for a list only when the items are genuinely parallel and independent: steps, options, criteria. When ideas connect or need context, write the paragraph. Do not announce a count and then enumerate it ("Here are three reasons"). Make the points. Do not number an unordered set, since numbers imply sequence or rank. Do not pad to a round number. If three points are real, ship three, not a padded five. Match the medium: an email or a prose post is not a slide deck or API docs.
Beyond prose
The register and the tells apply wherever you write, not only in essays and docs. Each surface carries its own slop, with the tells and rewrites in a sibling file:
- Formatting (headings, bold, lists, emoji, badges, smart quotes). See formatting.md.
- Code comments that narrate the diff or restate the code. See code-comments.md.
- Commit messages and PR descriptions that restate the diff instead of the reason for it. See commits-and-prs.md.
- Strings in code (test names, error and log messages). See code-strings.md.
One rule carries across all of them. Match the surrounding work: a file's comment density, a repo's commit history, a doc's heading style. These rules sharpen the writing, they do not override a house style.
Don't over-correct
The rules remove warmth that was not earned. They do not require coldness. Watch the second-order slop they can create:
- Clipped to the point of robotic. Vary sentence length. A run of five-word sentences is its own tell.
- Avoidance that produces a worse word. "Strong" is fine when you mean strong. The rule targets "robust" as a reflex, not the idea behind it.
- Cutting a transition that was doing real work. Drop filler, keep the connective a reader needs to follow the logic.
- Banning contrast itself. A real contrast sometimes needs "but". The target is the inflated "not just X, it's Y" cadence, not the word.
- Treating every list as slop. A real sequence of steps or set of options belongs in a list. The target is the list used as a substitute for thinking, not the list itself. An accurate count ("the five rules") is fine. A padded or announced-then-listed one is not.
When in doubt, read it aloud. If it sounds like a person explaining something they understand, keep it. If it sounds like a brochure, fix it.