---
author: 'Marcos Silva'
description:
  'Suggest precise, audience-appropriate revisions for generic or overly
  polished prose while preserving meaning. Use when a user asks to review a
  draft’s voice or clarity.'
extras:
  'Add labeled before/after fixtures from several document types and measure
  reviewer agreement.'
focus:
  'Identify generic, overly polished language and suggest precise revisions
  without changing meaning.'
id: 'unslop'
improve:
  - 'Make audience and project style an explicit input rather than a universal
    house voice.'
  - 'Treat score thresholds as calibrated defaults supported by evaluation
    examples, not fixed truth.'
  - 'Protect quotations, code, structured markup, and technical claims from
    stylistic rewriting.'
name: 'unslop'
path: '../submitted-skills/Marcos%20Silva/skills/unslop/SKILL.md'
status: 'Thoughtful style review'
title: 'Unslop'
wins:
  - 'Useful tell list and a deliberately non-destructive review orientation.'
  - 'References acknowledge context and audience concerns.'
---

# unslop

## Inputs

Draft text, intended audience, and an applicable project style reference when
one exists.

## Workflow

1. Preserve frontmatter, code, XML/HTML, quotations, and technical claims.
2. Identify specific tells using `references/tells.md`; consult the selected
   style reference before recommending a change.
3. Return small, anchored edits and explain the reader benefit.

## Rules

- Do not call a dialect, disagreement, or concise writing “slop.”
- Do not rewrite facts, cited wording, or structured content for style.
- Treat scoring thresholds as review aids, not publication gates, unless the
  project defines them.

## Output

Return the audience assumption, findings, minimal suggested diffs, preserved
sections, and any style-policy uncertainty.
