Completes the last unchecked action on the #88 decision record, so a future contributor finds the openly-licensed-vs-paywalled line here instead of re-arguing it in a PR thread. Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
3.9 KiB
Contributing
Thanks for helping improve this skill. It teaches an LLM (and now a deterministic engine) to spot and fix AI-writing tells. Contributions are welcome — a few things keep the project coherent.
How the repo fits together
| Path | What it holds |
|---|---|
SKILL.md |
The human-readable catalog of rules. The source of truth for what counts as an AI tell. |
detector/patterns.js |
The deterministic engine — the executable subset of the rules. |
detector/CATEGORIES.md |
The map between SKILL.md rules and detector types. Keep it current. |
README.md |
The pitch and the numbered prose-pattern list. |
cursor-rules/, plugins/ |
Editor and tool integrations. |
Adding or changing a rule
First decide which kind of rule it is:
- Regex-detectable (a phrase, a character, a structural shape) → add it to
SKILL.md, add the detection todetector/patterns.jswith a newtype, and add a row todetector/CATEGORIES.md. Cover it with a fixture indetector/patterns.test.js(both a true positive and a case that must not fire). - Judgment-only (needs reading for meaning — tone, structure, name-dropping)
→ add it to
SKILL.mdprose and list it under "Skill-only" indetector/CATEGORIES.md. There is no detector type for these.
If you are unsure which it is, open an issue first and we will sort it out.
Precision over recall
This skill is deliberately biased toward false negatives: a rule that wrongly flags ordinary human writing is worse than one that misses a tell, because false positives erode trust in every other rule. Before proposing a rule, ask who would get flagged by mistake, and add carve-outs for the legitimate cases. A signal that fires on most normal prose is not worth adding.
Cite your sources
If your rule rests on a factual claim about how AI or humans write — "ChatGPT emits curly quotes by default," "most writers rarely do X" — link a source for it. These claims get checked, and some turn out wrong or more nuanced than they first seem (smart quotes, for instance, are a typing-time default on macOS and in Word, not a publication-step artifact). A claim with a citation can be verified; an asserted one can't. Put the links in the PR description or inline in the rule.
Style guides and licensing
The rules from the #88 license audit, recorded here so nobody has to rediscover them:
- This repo bundles no style guide it cannot verify the license for. The
--stylelayer is config-driven; users supply their own conventions. - Openly-licensed guides may ship later as example configs (Google, Microsoft, GOV.UK, and 18F qualify), using Vale's attribution pattern: disclaim endorsement, name the license, link the guide upstream.
- Paywalled guides (CMOS, APA, MLA, AP) are never shipped, in any form, under any name. Passing one to
--stylefalls through to the fallback that claims no compliance. The reason is trademark and verifiability, not maintenance burden.
Run the tests
npm test
This runs the engine fixtures and the CATEGORIES.md contract checks: every
detector type must be documented, every documented type must be real, and every
prose statement of the engine type total must match the code. All must pass. No
dependencies to install; Node 18+ only.
Write clean prose
This repo polices writing quality, so the prose you add has to clear the same
bar. Run your additions through the skill itself. Keep rule bullets terse and
lead with the directive — match the length and tone of the bullets already in
SKILL.md. Drop intensifiers like "strong" or "powerful"; let the rule stand on
its own.
Changelog and versioning
Add an entry to CHANGELOG.md under a dated, versioned heading
(## [X.Y.Z] — YYYY-MM-DD), matching the existing entries. A new rule is a minor
version bump; update the version: field in the SKILL.md frontmatter to match.