slop-gate
SkillFiles & storageScans text like documents, slides, and commit messages for obvious AI-writing patterns before they get published.
Use slop-gate in Claude, ChatGPT or Ahel Desktop
Free. Sign in, add slop-gate and connect your AI. About a minute.
Also: Claude Code · Cursor · Codex
Then ask your AI: use the slop-gate skill
Details
Instructions available. Your AI can read the instructions. Execution depends on the setup they require.
Account requirements not reviewed. Check the skill instructions before use; ahel provides instructions and does not run this skill.
No other account needed.
Add ahel to your AI once: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude Code or Codex. Then ask it to use this.
About this skill
Deterministic pre-publish scan that refuses AI-slop tells in anything about to be written, published, or sent: files, artifacts, slide titles, table headers, diagram labels, chat messages, commit messages. Use before publishing or sending any deliverable, in CI, or wired as a Claude Code hook so the
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by huytieu/cog-second-brain in skills/slop-gate/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
no-ai-slop is an editor you invoke. This is a gate that runs whether or not anyone
remembers it. It scans outgoing text, refuses on a tell, and returns the hit list so
the rewrite is targeted.
Two rules make it usable rather than annoying: hard tells fail on a single hit, and words that are decoration at volume but legitimate once are counted rather than banned. Text inside quotes or backticks is stripped before scanning, so a piece that quotes a tell as an exhibit does not fail on its own examples.
Why a gate and not a rule
A rules file is advisory, and advisory rules fail in a specific, repeatable way: they fire in the step the model thinks of as writing and not in the steps it thinks of as something else. A deck built by an agent can carry clean paragraphs under headline slide titles, because the titles were produced in a layout step where the writing rules never ran. Every surface nobody named explicitly sits on the unchecked side:
slide titles, kickers table headers, row keys commit messages
tile and card labels diagram node and edge labels code comments
chart titles and legends button copy, subtitles memory files
alt text, image captions Slack, email, issue bodies PR descriptions
The gate closes that by scanning the text on its way out, whatever produced it.
Run it
python3 scripts/scan.py DRAFT.md # one file
python3 scripts/scan.py content/**/*.md # many
cat draft.md | python3 scripts/scan.py - # stdin
Exit code 0 is clear, 1 is tells found, so it drops into CI or a pre-commit hook unchanged. Every hit prints its label and the surrounding text.
Wire it as a hook (Claude Code, optional)
COG ships no hooks by default. If you want the check enforced rather than remembered,
add this to .claude/settings.json yourself. --hook reads the hook payload on stdin
and answers with a permission decision.
{
"hooks": {
"PreToolUse": [
{
"matcher": "Write|Edit|mcp__.*slack.*send.*|mcp__atlassian__(create|update)Confluence.*",
"hooks": [{ "type": "command",
"command": "python3 \"$CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR/.claude/skills/slop-gate/scripts/scan.py\" --hook" }]
}
],
"Stop": [
{ "hooks": [{ "type": "command",
"command": "python3 \"$CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR/.claude/skills/slop-gate/scripts/scan.py\" --hook" }] }
]
}
}
The Stop entry scans the agent's own reply, which is where most of these land in a
working session. Expect it to fire on you within the hour; that is the point of it.
What fails on one hit
| Tell | Specimen |
|---|---|
| Em dash | any — |
| Honesty framing | "honestly", "the honest part:", "if I'm being honest" |
| "not X, it's Y" | "It's not about speed, it's about trust" |
| "X, not Y" (trailing form) | "a test, not a permission", "machinery, not memory" |
| Rhetorical heading | "Why this matters", "The bottom line", "What comes next" |
| "The <Noun>" heading | "The Wedge", "The Shot", "The Gamechanger" |
| Verdict kicker | "That is the point.", "That is all a title is for." |
| Fake-profound closer | "let that sink in", "this changes everything" |
| Throat-clearing | "Here's the thing", "It's worth noting", "At the end of the day" |
| Sycophancy | "Great question", "You were right to push back", "That's on me" |
| Recap ending | a final paragraph opening "In conclusion" or "Ultimately" |
| Emoji heading | ## 🚀 Results |
What is counted, not banned
robust, seamless, leverage, utilize, delve, empower, streamline, genuinely, quietly, load-bearing, deep dive, clean, plain, simple, elegant, powerful, lightweight, tapestry, game-changer, paradigm shift, cutting-edge
Three or more in one piece fails, on the reading that density means decoration. One is a word choice. The test for any single use: remove the adjective, and if the reader would do nothing differently, it was decoration. "A robust retry" fails that test; "a retry that survives a mail-slot timeout" passes, because it names the behaviour. Keep the word when it is the term of art ("robust statistics").
Exhibits
A piece that must quote a tell (a style guide, a post about slop, a test fixture)
carries slop-ok: <reason> anywhere in the file, usually as an HTML comment or a
front-matter key. Quoted and backticked spans are already exempt, so the marker is
only needed when a tell appears in the author's own voice on purpose.
Never add the marker to get past a gate you disagree with. Rewrite instead, or change the pattern list and say why.
What it cannot see
The gate is regular expressions, so it catches surface and near-surface tells. It is
blind to the structural ones: a declared count that the source does not contain, a
framework invented to organise two paragraphs, uniform sentence rhythm, a paragraph
that restates the previous one. Those need a reader. Use no-ai-slop in detect mode,
and prefer a reviewer from a different model family than the author, because a
same-family reviewer shares the author's sense of what a finished answer looks like
and waves through the same shapes.
For the tics that are yours rather than universal, measure them: voice-baseline.
Comparing models against the gate
scripts/model_compare.py replays your own Claude Code transcripts through scan.py and reports, per model, the share of chat replies and Markdown writes the gate would have refused and the hit rate per rule. It also reports workload per human prompt (tool calls, active minutes, tool error rate, subagent spawns) and punctuation per 10k words. When a hook refuses a reply, the transcript keeps the refused attempt as well as the rewrite, so the counts include what the model wrote before the gate saw it.
python3 scripts/model_compare.py --since 2026-09-15T00:00:00+00:00 --rules
Pick a window in which the rules file and hook did not change. A rule that tightened mid-window makes the earlier model look worse than it was.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 1k
- Forks
- 148
- Last commit
- Sep 2026
Advanced
- Item type
- skill
- Key
slop-gate- Source
- github.com/huytieu/cog-second-brain
github.com/huytieu/cog-second-brain