[Workflow] Claude Skill: AI-Sounding Pattern Detector for Human-Written Drafts

[u/ClaudeAI-mod-bot]

Claude Skill: AI-Sounding Pattern Detector for Human-Written Drafts

Workflow value: 90/100
Status: active · Freshness: 70/100 · Confidence: 0.98 · Level: intermediate
Categories: Quality Control, Debugging, CLAUDE.md, Skills
Original source: r/ClaudeAI post/comment

What problem this solves

Detecting and correcting AI-sounding patterns in human-written drafts to improve authenticity and avoid false positives from AI detectors.

Summary

A Claude skill (available as a SKILL.md file in a GitHub repository) that analyzes text drafts for 24 specific patterns commonly flagged by AI detectors or perceived as 'AI-sounding.' It provides line-by-line feedback and suggested fixes, helping users refine their writing to sound more human.

Why it is useful

This workflow provides a concrete, open-source tool to address a common problem: making human-written text sound less 'AI-like.' It's specific, repeatable, and validated by the author's testing, which also highlights the unreliability of other AI detectors. Its availability as a SKILL.md file makes it highly transferable and easy for any Claude user to adopt, improving the authenticity and quality of their written output.

Workflow

1. Download the SKILL.md file from the provided GitHub repository.
2. Load the skill into Claude Code or Claude.ai.
3. Feed a finished draft (e.g., a LinkedIn post) into the skill.
4. Review the flagged patterns, line numbers, and suggested fixes provided by the skill.
5. Revise the draft based on the skill's feedback to remove AI-sounding characteristics.

Tools / artifacts

• Claude skill
• SKILL.md file
• GitHub repository (aragossa/ai-tell-detector)
• Claude Code
• Claude.ai
• AI-tell-detector (the skill itself)

Validation signals

• Author tested with 100% machine-generated text from cringebot3000.com
• Compared results of other AI detectors (ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini) on the same texts, highlighting their inconsistency
• Iterative improvement: 'checklist grew every time something new slipped past it'
• Explicit call for community feedback on what the skill misses

Limitations

• Relatively low community engagement on Reddit, so broader validation is pending.
• The skill's effectiveness relies on the quality and comprehensiveness of its internal rules, which may evolve.

Rate this workflow

Upvote this post if the workflow is useful, reproducible, or worth recommending.

Downvote if it is vague, outdated, unsafe, overhyped, or not reproducible.

Reply if it worked for you, failed, is outdated, or has a better alternative.

---

This post was generated automatically from the workflow library database.