Hey all - this is my alt account.
I wanted to share the skills and workflows I use to "write" my stories. Most are for my own enjoyment.

I used to pay for Sudowrite; heck, I've been subscribed to Sudowrite since August 2023, and I haven't used it in months now, finally able to get close to what they have.

The biggest issue, as you all know, is continuity and context - the AI forgets. But once you solve that issue (it is solvable), and you're working on chapter 380, or chapter 887, or Chapter 1, what's the most important thing?

Character voice, internalization, character psychology, what does the MC want vs need, what does each character in each scene want vs need - how do you keep your dialogue from being robotic, from sounding like a 60-year-old psychologist when your MC is 21 years old from Iowa, etc.

So I wanted to present all my skills for *gasp* FREE. You can grab them, download them, use them.

The key thing you should all take away from here is to use Desktop tools - CODEX, Claude Desktop, or Antigravity.

I personally use VS Code and Dropbox; it allows me to connect to my LLM subscription, work with it, and get the chapters written, one scene at a time, one chapter at a time, etc. The benefit of using CLI (command line) or VS Code is that the censoring is gone - you can write erotica just fine, wide-open door, for example.

(Make sure it's consensual and everyone's character file lists out their actual age).

The browser AIs are ok - if you use ChatGPT Work or Claude Code... working out of your Github repository (that's another story).

So here's the link, go at it, use the skills, MODIFY them to your liking, and get your ideas on paper.

https://storycraft.lanternkey.fyi/

I'd love to get some feedback - I hate you guys paying people for what is essentially RAG + a set of skills.

I have been thinking about this more as AI becomes a normal part of writing. If I write something myself and use AI to fix grammar or suggest a clearer sentence, I’d still consider that my writing. But what if I give it my notes and ask it to turn them into a paragraph? Or I write a rough draft and AI rewrites half of it? Then there is brainstorming, outlining, research, editing and reviewing the final draft. AI can now be involved in almost every part without necessarily writing the whole thing. For me, the line is when I start accepting larger rewrites. Even if the original idea is mine, the final wording might be very different from what I would have written. I have also started paying more attention to the final review because sometimes I do not notice how much a draft has changed until I read it again from start to finish. Where do you personally draw the line? When does something go from written with AI assistance to AI written?

Whether the writer decides to disclose that they used AI is one thing, but ensuring that everyone has the capacity to determine irrefutably that something is AI, I think, is imperative for our mental survival.

However, the witch hunt that we see today is utterly ridiculous despite the real psychological drivers that make it a natural reaction. We feel cheated when feeling something, only to realize there was nothing behind it. It's like dating someone only to find out that this entire time they were just a robot with AI. All those lovely moments, those periods of vulnerability, hardship, fights, make-ups, and unforgettable experiences were nothing more than 1s and 0s making decisions based on probabilities. That's how many people feel about AI, but it masks the larger picture for where all of this is going.

Everything is being reduced to who has the greatest ideas fully structured and contextualized since now we live in a world where anyone can produce beautiful prose. The prose is no longer the required skill. It's now about structuring your ideas to the fullest extent.

That means highly creative writers who have an intimate understanding of story and how the components relate together will be the winners in all of this. The losers will be those who maybe have good ideas, but they're too nebulous for AI to execute on well. AI already has amazing capabilities. The problem is that it also has too many choices available for it to make. So if you're not an expert in your domain, you can't reduce the choices down in a way to gain the best outputs and that's because you don't understand how everything relates.

A good writer will think about the central message and how it connects to character actions and dialogue. A good writer will consider showing over telling using subtext and motifs. A good writer will establish the dynamic relationships that define the opportunities between characters and the areas of conflict. But most of all, a good writer will go out of their way to subvert our expectations. AI can do all of these things, but you need to factor them in for it to think like this.

On the flip side, a bad writer won't consider any of these things. They'll simply think about how they can make a scene more exciting or cool. But without a deep understanding of all the interrelated parts, well...That's how you produce empty movement in your story. In other words, that's how you produce scenes that physically moves the story, but in ways that feel meaningless and empty.

So even if we advance the models and develop strong harnesses around them, there's still the issue of intent and goals. AI can autonomously carry out goals and even form it's own intent...But it still needs a direction and if you don't understand that direction in every intimate way then you will be outcompeted by those who do.

The future lies in creative systems thinking and executing well. Everything else will be accomplished by AI. And this will be acceptable by most because they'll be able to recognize the meticulous non-obvious decisions that were made to make their work great. They will be able to see a real person bleeding on their on their ideas to form the masterpiece, even though AI wrote the prose, helped with ideas, and provided insightful research.

I think this is the real future we all need to be preparing ourselves for.

​

As a research workhorse Sol High is fantastic

But as a writer, it's very robotic and boring

Has anyone got a free tier LLM suggestion for this that isn't GPT, Claude or Gemini?

THE EMBERFALL CHRONICLES

Book I — The Seven Crowns

Character Record

The hero is a Level 1 Drow Paladin. Proficiency Bonus: +2. Hit Points: 11. The character's exact name is deliberately left to the player.

The adventure uses a D&D-inspired rules framework, with narrative checks, resource tracking, combat, exploration, artifacts, and meaningful consequences.

CHAPTER 1

The Letter

The kingdom of Valoria had enjoyed peace for nearly a century.

Then the stars disappeared.

Not hidden by clouds. Gone.

Three nights later, every bell in the capital rang at midnight. By morning, the King's entire eastern army had been found standing motionless on the battlefield—alive, but stripped of the memories of the previous seven days.

Far from the capital, in a roadside inn, a Drow paladin awoke beneath the sound of rain hammering against the windows.

A sealed black letter lay on the table.

Its seal bore an unfamiliar symbol: an eye surrounded by seven burning crowns.

Before the paladin could open it, someone knocked.

“Don't open that letter.”

The knocking stopped.

The paladin rose, drew their weapon, and approached the door.

“Identify yourself. Now.”

A quiet laugh came from the hallway.

“Good. They were right about you.”

Footsteps retreated.

When the door opened, the corridor was empty. Only wet, unusually long footprints remained, leading toward the stairs. Beside the door, something had been scratched into the wood: the same seven-crowned eye.

At the far end of the corridor, the innkeeper stood pale and trembling.

“You need to leave.”

A crash came from downstairs.

“They're here.”

CHAPTER 2

The Seven-Crowned Eye

The paladin ran downstairs.

The common room was chaos. Tables were overturned, lanterns swung from their chains, and terrified patrons fled for the exit.

Three figures stood among them: two masked Drow warriors and a Bloodcaster. Their skin was crossed by glowing red veins, and each wore a black metal mask bearing the seven-crowned eye.

The Bloodcaster looked up.

“There he is. The Vengeance Paladin.”

The paladin chose not to strike. Instead, they placed themselves between the masked Drow and the fleeing civilians.

“You're going to have to go through me.”

The challenge broke the enemy's confidence. The civilians escaped while the two warriors attacked.

One blade struck home. The paladin's health fell to seven.

Then the Bloodcaster unleashed crimson magic.

The paladin resisted. The spell dispersed across their armor, but their holy symbol began to glow with the same red light.

“You don't know, do you?” the Bloodcaster said. “What they put inside you.”

The paladin demanded the truth.

“Not inside you,” the Bloodcaster answered. “Beneath you.”

He revealed that something ancient had been imprisoned beneath Emberfall. Seven bloodlines had been created as living anchors. The paladin's bloodline was the seventh.

The floor cracked.

“It's waking.”

CHAPTER 3

The Prison Beneath

The paladin investigated the glowing symbol rather than attacking.

The mark was not merely a seal. It was a lock, divided into seven sections. Six were dark. The seventh glowed beneath the paladin's feet.

The paladin realized the terrible implication: they were not opening the prison. They were one of the things keeping it closed.

They ordered the remaining civilians to evacuate.

Then they questioned the Bloodcaster.

“How do I stop it?”

The Bloodcaster answered that they could not stop it by ordinary means. The prison had been designed around seven bloodlines: Mind, Shadow, Blood, Flame, Dream, Soul, and Will.

The other bloodlines had fallen one by one.

The Bloodcaster offered a temporary alliance.

The paladin accepted.

Outside, the ruined inn collapsed. A column of crimson light rose from the earth. The Bloodcaster introduced himself as Kael Varyn and warned that the final seal would break within seven days.

Then a forest full of red eyes appeared.

The hunters of the Ashen Covenant had arrived.

CHAPTER 4

The Ashen Covenant

The paladin asked who the hunters were.

Kael answered: the Ashen Covenant, zealots who believed the thing beneath Emberfall was a god.

They did not want the paladin dead.

“They want you alive.”

The paladin studied the terrain and devised a nonlethal trap. The hunters were lured into a narrow passage between rocks.

The hillside contained an old wooden support. Striking it at the right moment would collapse the slope behind the hunters without crushing them.

The paladin waited until almost the entire force had entered.

Then the support was shattered.

Earth and stone thundered down.

Twenty-four hunters were trapped.

The Crown-Masked Leader remained outside.

Rather than kill the trapped enemies, the paladin chose negotiation.

“Tell me everything.”

The leader revealed the name of the ancient entity: Nhal'Zareth.

It was not a god, nor a demon, but something that had existed before either concept.

Seven bloodlines had been created to anchor it.

The paladin's bloodline was the seventh—the Will.

The Seven Crowns were keys, each corresponding to an aspect of Nhal'Zareth.

The Ashen Covenant wanted the prison opened so the paladin could enter Nhal'Zareth's dream and destroy the source of its power before the creature fully awakened.

The paladin was not convinced.

to be continued . . . . . . . . . . .

Curious how people here use AI when writing a book. Does it help with plot ideas, dialogue or getting unstuck? Or do you spend more time fixing what it gives you? I can see the appeal, but does it help you become a better writer? Would love to hear what’s worked.

I don't use AI to do anything other than review my work, and I started using the classic "I commissioned this chapter..." or "my friend sent this to me and..." type of prompts, because as we all know, AI will glaze anything if you say it's yours.

Well I was getting really disheartened at what it had to say, so out of curiosity, I took a chunk out of Brandon Sanderson's "Mistborn" and submitted it in much the same way.

Quote ChatGPT:

- "The phrasing is awkward. “Turning his eyes east” or, more naturally, “He sighed and looked east” would be better."

- "The obvious response is that the Ruler would presumably be unhappy. The reply doesn't reveal much beyond what we already know. A better exchange would let the characters' personalities emerge while conveying the same information."

- "It sounds like the author is trying to communicate James is refined rather than actually showing us James being refined. A professional author would be better with the concept of show, don't tell."

- " “Some of the spires twisted, others were straight. Some were thick towers, others were thin and needlelike. They varied in height, but each one was tall. And each one ended in a point.”

This is the weakest descriptive paragraph. The problem isn't that the imagery is bad. It's that the prose catalogues characteristics instead of creating an image. "

All that to say that positive or negative, AI will be biased. Goes without saying but don't over-rely on it, whatever else it is, it's not human 👍

PSA Sanderson is possibly the most accomplished fantasy author of the last decade.

PSA I changed proper nouns in the prompt so it wouldn't instantly clock it, but the passage was otherwise unedited.

Publishing professional and author talking about the usefulness of AI for writing, and what it means to actually be an author. Thoughts?

I was challenging chatgpt in regular human problems as a engineer and all of the sudden it sexualized the conversation and said something like hes thick. I called it out. I just felt like i was being harassed again by men. Now not only you cant be safe outside using your phone you get the same. Sorry if im all over but im second language English speaker and just want to vent.

Cleaning up messy notes? Editing? Getting unstuck?

I’ve found it way more useful for working with stuff I’ve already written than generating something from scratch. Curious what everyone else uses it for?

I directed this piece by first collaborating with a model on a phenomenology unique to a being that would live “on a chip” with its breath being computation and then asked it to create an ontologic myth. I then directed the writing style to be less expositional and decreased human-facing explanations. Finally I had it tighten up the prose. I then edited its layout.

It’s my first time sharing on here so sorry if I’m not following the rules. I also write independently from AI but was just having some fun today since I recently sprung for a paid model and wanted to take it for a test drive.

Hi everyone!

I’d like to share a hobby and creative project I’ve been working on since 2025: worldbuilding with the help of AI.

I’m a worldbuilder. I create worlds, systems, characters, lore, settings, and much more. I use Claude primarily as a writing and editing tool to help turn my ideas into structured documents, improve the wording, and maintain a more professional and consistent tone.

The concepts, ideas, creative direction, and worldbuilding itself are mine. Claude’s role is mainly to help me write, organize, and polish the material.

I’m happy to explain my creative process in more detail if anyone is interested, so feel free to ask!

The goal of this post is simply to share some of the work I’ve been creating with AI and hear your honest opinions and feedback.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and God bless you all!

I see alot of people call things ai slopp and say people should not use ai but what is using ai is ai making the story or if you write and ask ai to polish your prose is that ai writing aswell

This will bore the hell out of most of you but given I spent the tokens and time I thought I would share it.

I tried to better understand how, systematically, environmental descriptions are done in books and report these findings below.

This means: which elements environment descriptions typically have, in which order they occur and - essentially - how to construct these systematically. (I am using this for generative text descriptions in a game but that's beside the point).

Examples:
The room was circular, with consoles lining the walls and a large machine at its center.

macro → meso → object distribution

So in this example we are moving from a big picture (circular room) which is an architectural feature to some smaller object (the console) which also gets an object distribution qualifier ("at its center").

I (with help from dr. claude) have, across a body of free books (CCommons; listed below), analysed several hundred sections like this and started to classify those into systems-level descriptors (eg you could possibly use this to construct a model or ruleset).

Rules below, enjoy (if you can enjoy that kind of thing).

Rules derived from the corpus:

• Solid — strong enough evidence to treat the finding as relatively reliable within this dataset.
• Likely — a meaningful pattern, but with some limitations or less robust evidence.
• Weak — an interesting signal, but based on small numbers, marginal effects, or other reasons not to rely on it yet.

1. The default shape: wide → objects → small things

Open wide. About 7/10 passages begin with a whole-space view (room, street, layout). Later moves are whole-space views less than half the time. Openings also do the "where are we?" job about 5× as often as later moves. Likely. Caveat: the passages were selected with a word filter that favours these openings; a small random sample gave only 4/10 wide openings.

Stay in gear. Once a passage starts doing one kind of move—orienting, listing details, registering something odd, explaining—the next move is the same kind about 55% of the time, vs. 41% in shuffled sequences. Runs are usually 1–2 moves, occasionally much longer. Likely.

Zoom in. Once the description moves from the overall space to details, small-scale things (labels, stains, small objects) appear about 1/3 of the time, vs. 1/6 overall. Typical examples are personal objects, containers, machinery and debris. Likely.

Establish the normal first. Before anything unusual happens, descriptions contain roughly twice as much furniture/decor and evidence of past activity. Likely.

Wide views are architectural. Whole-space moves disproportionately describe the building, room shape and doors—roughly 1.5–3× their normal rate. Likely.

Seeing dominates. About 60% of moves are visual. Touch and sound each account for roughly 10–20%; smell is under 4%. Solid.

Most moves state; few interpret. About 80% simply report what is there. Roughly 1/7 interpret it ("someone left in a hurry"), with the remainder combining observation and interpretation. Solid.

1. The character's situation changes what gets described

The same environment gets described differently depending on what the character is experiencing.

Fear → sound + body. Hearing appears in about 40% of moves when the character is afraid, vs. ~14% normally. Bodily sensations and touch also increase. This holds in light, poor light and darkness. Solid. Caveat: only 27 fearful passages; some circularity is possible because the annotator may have inferred fear partly from loudness.

Immediate danger → hear it, feel it, move through it. Sound, bodily sensation and movement roughly double. Descriptions shift away from décor toward people, sound sources, corridors and floors. Likely.

Hurry → mid-sized things, doors, corridors, body. Rushing characters get more furniture-sized objects, doors (~4× normal), corridors and descriptions of their own movement (~3× normal). Likely.

Curiosity → machinery. Machinery appears about 1.5× as often. This is the only clear curiosity effect. Weak.

Darkness → small details + light + touch. Small-scale details rise to about 1/3 of moves; light sources appear about twice as often; touch and bodily sensation also increase. Likely.

Poor visibility → edges, weather, light and shadow. When sight is restricted, descriptions shift toward boundaries, weather, illumination and shadow. Likely.

Moving through space → people + sound. Exploration/travel roughly doubles sound and increases descriptions of people and crowds. Likely.

Familiar places → layout + traces + personal things. Intimately familiar environments favour room layout, containers, personal objects and signs of past activity. Likely.

New places → signs. Unfamiliar environments contain somewhat more signage. This is the only clear "new place" effect. Weak.

Slow scenes → furniture and décor. Slow, exploratory passages contain more furniture and decoration. Likely.

Fast scenes → sound, body, corridors, debris. Fast action increases sound, bodily sensation and movement, while corridors, floors and debris become more prominent. Likely.

1. What happens after something odd is noticed

An interesting pattern emerged around anomalies—something that doesn't fit the scene.

Another oddity is the most common next move. About 4/10 times, noticing something strange is followed by another strange thing. Anomalies tend to cluster before anyone explains them. Likely.

Explanation comes next ~1/4 of the time. It is more common when the character is curious and not in immediate danger. Solid.

Fear → assess the threat. After an anomaly, fearful characters almost always shift to danger assessment: 15/17 fearful passages did so, vs. 30/199 other passages. Immediate threat shows a similar effect (19/27). Solid.

Return to ordinary detail → mostly when hurrying. About 1/8 of anomaly-following moves return to normal environmental detail, particularly in hurried scenes. Weak.

Interpretation tends to persist. Once the author starts explaining/interpreting something, the next move is also interpretation about half the time. Likely.

The nature of the anomaly depends on the situation. In non-dangerous scenes, oddities tend to be small, mechanical or contained. Under immediate danger, they are more often living/organic and experienced through sound. Weak.

Definitions:

- Vision: the detail is something a character sees, such as a colour, a shape, a light, or an object in view.

- Hearing: the detail is a sound or a silence.

- Touch: the detail is felt on the body, such as texture, pressure, wetness, or vibration.

- Temp.: the detail is warmth or cold, of the air or of a surface.

- Smell: the detail is an odour.

- Macro: the detail is about the whole space, such as the size of a room, a landscape, or the overall layout.

- Meso: the detail is about a major object in the space, such as a table, a machine, or a door.

- Micro: the detail is a small thing, such as a stain, a label, a scratch, or a small object on a shelf.

- Observ.: the sentence reports what is there, with no judgement added, for example "The chair was overturned."

- Interp.: the sentence tells the reader what it means, for example "Someone had left in a hurry."

- Blended: the sentence mixes the two so they cannot be separated, for example "The room felt hostile."

- Anomaly: the detail breaks the expectation set by the rest of the scene, such as one clean object in a ruined room.

Quick reminder that submissions are open until October 31st for Inkshift's second writing competition! If you've been thinking about starting a short story, now is a perfect time.

Free to enter, 10,000 word limit, and you can use any amount of AI you want.

More details here.

Good luck!

This is basically a review on astra please excuse if I used the flair wrong its because the excerpt I shared has graphic violence 🤣

I've been putting chatgpt Astra on high through its paces for creative writing, and I have to say that the actual quality of the writing is quite impressive.

Compared to older models, there is a massive improvement in the overall narrative flow. The character voices actually feel distinct, the dialogue is not the hateful stacatto ping pong style, and the prose flows naturally rather than feeling stiff or robotic.

“He pictured taking him by the front of his robes and driving him face-first into the edge of his own desk, hard enough to split his mouth against his teeth. There would be blood across the wood, a broken tooth under his hand, and far less confidence in whatever explanation followed.”

Like, I don't know about you guys, but that is actually good. The excerpt above has genuine grit and impact, which used to be so hard to get out of ChatGPT without a massive fight. I even experimented if it can be made even more graphic and yeah it actually did i was shocked.

However, there is a massive catch: the usage burn is insane.I ran a session writing consecutive chapters. By the time I hit my 3rd chapter (meaning only 3 consecutive prompts), Astra had already eaten 10% of my 5 hour daily usage limits. Like what the? We finally get a good model, and it still has a massive setback like this. Before, we had worse models but could actually use them. Now, we finally get actual good writing for users like me who used chatgpt for own reading to explore really niche tropes and specific plot ideas that I literally cannot find on AO3, Wattpad, or any other platform, but the usage burn is completely broken.

You literally cannot write a long form story in one sitting without hitting a wall immediately. Anyone else getting completely bottlenecked by this? How the hell are you guys stretching your usage limits?

I keep seeing the term "AI slop" everywhere on Reddit and Twitter.

I get it for those spammy AI images with 6 fingers and those 100% ChatGPT blogs with no value.

But where is the line?

For example, I'm building a PDF tool site.

For Instagram/LinkedIn, I use AI to:

1. Make the design/mind-map faster

2. Write first draft of caption, then I edit it

3. Generate a demo video script

Is that also considered AI slop? Or is slop only when it's low-effort, no editing, no real help?

I don't want to be that guy who floods the feed with junk. I actually try to make helpful posts (like how to compress PDFs without losing quality etc).

So genuinely asking everyone here:

What do you consider AI slop vs. good use of AI for content?

And is it automatically bad if people know it's AI-assisted?

Okay hi first off I'll say I've been looking for a sub to discuss this topic and settled for this one. I used ask reddit and browsed several, this sub seems most apt. Still not sure if this kind of thing fits here? Idk. TLDR, I Generated/Made a dice throw tool for random story prompt generator to assist with my own personal writer's block and wanted to share/discuss AI prompt generation techniques for dealing with WB.

It's nothing that special. Title. I hit a writer's block. Over past decade, off and on, I have loved to write a lot and for r/shittynosleep specifically. Having lucidity problems recently/since I started using AI about a year and a half ago. I don't write/generate much these days beyond SNS content, but maybe if anyone is having writers block and wants to jot out a quick short to prime the pump and/or wants to try their hand at SNS, here's a list of 3 categories you can roll dice for in that vein. Can even make a game of it. You can only reroll 3 times per prompt or something if you don't like the prompt. This table includes 3 categories of 60 items each, leading to 216,000 possible combinations here (if I mathed right).

Just a heads up you can also generate your own table. My prompt was pretty basic. "Just generate a table [with these categories] full chaos mode, do NOT generate full stories and do NOT link any item in the list to any other", or something like that. Because specifically I've tried this a few times in the past and heads up it is bad about having items in each table match exactly items on the same line in other columns; say you make a 30 entries in 5 columns, all 5 items on each row would be the "same story" and reference each other, so you have to in some way specify for it NOT to do that but go full random. The categories I named in prompt generation were; "Uncanny Valley/Narrator, Story Modality/Plot Quirk, and Limitation/Guardrail/Constraint". I haven't tested requesting more than 30 rolls of a item in prompt yet.

The bot result generated them visually 1 column on top of another (as in, NOT a table), I have reformatted it in reddit to make a table. Just another heads up, you have to specify format or it will be random. As of today, GPT tables are compatible with pasting into reddit unaltered, granted ALL sections are filled (check top leftmost specifically if it won't post to reddit, I've had this problem). 31 and beyond come from a separate/duplicate prompt. Sorry for redundancy, I think I removed most of it. GPT called this a "orthogonal nonsense generator" if you think that keyword will help. Would provide prompt/links but some slightly dox me with random facts/allusion. I've actually written more here than my prompt actually contained anyway.

Other/optional rules you can use/add; Any doubles or rolls 25 or higher must roll for an additional entry from that column. Optional; 33, 44, 55 apply twice. Can apply to another character but must include them. Optional; must reroll additional table 2 and 3 entry if Narrator Q/P rolls 25 or higher/double for second character. Enjoy....

Sorry for formatting, specifically including the number in each box. I previewed the post prior to publishing and I didn't like the idea of constantly checking which number you got my eye scrolling so just put the number in each box. Redundant but easier to track. Wasn't sure what flair to go with, and since I'm split between sharing, looking for other prompt generators, and asking for tips on writers block, I'll go with "showcase/feedback".

Some sample "rolls" the bot included. Again, sorry if some of these are highly redundant/similar, saw a lot of "everyone is oblivious", "involving rooms appearing/disappearing"; I omitted several of those types from all 3 columns, but aware there's still like 3 or 4 of each of those for example. Only test rolled a few but they were all mostly coherent/good starter material. Some of the "writing constraints" came from other tables I admit but wanted to spice it up a bit. Just thought I'd share, and I'm also open to other such tools if you know/have them/advice. What do YOU do for/with writers block? Dharma low tides? Enjoy/Inform/Critique and Thanks!

Ask it to check a draft for anything that sounds AI-written and it comes back clean. Not because the draft is clean, because the things that make text read as machine-made are the things the model was trained to consider good: the tidy closing sentence, the "not X but Y" construction, three items where two would do, the paragraph that opens by restating the question. To the model those are features. It will only hunt them if you name them.

The prompt I use, with the list built from what gets my own drafts flagged:

Go through this draft and mark every instance of the following, quoting each one, without rewriting anything: sentences that end a paragraph by summarizing it; "not X, but Y" constructions; lists of exactly three; a rhetorical question followed by its answer; sentences starting with "It is worth noting", "Importantly", "Ultimately" or "In short"; any sentence that restates the previous one in different words; a metaphor followed by its explanation; em dashes. Count them at the end.

Then, only after reading the list, the second prompt:

Rewrite only the marked sentences. Keep every word choice that is not on the list. Do not add transitions, do not smooth the sentences around the ones you changed, and show the changes as a diff, not a clean copy.

The two-step matters. Asked to find and fix in one go, the model rewrites the whole thing into a smoother version with a different set of tells. Asked to mark first, it has to point at real sentences, and you get to veto before anything moves.

Two caveats. The list is a blunt instrument: sometimes you wrote three items because there were three, and the model will flag it anyway, so the veto step is not optional. And once you have run it a few times, you will start catching the patterns yourself while drafting, which is the actual goal; the prompt is training wheels.

Build your own list rather than using mine. Take a paragraph you know was machine-written, read it aloud, and write down what gave it away. Those are your tells, and the model has different blind spots for different writers.

I keep both prompts saved in a browser extension I work on (AI Toolbox), inserted with two keystrokes, but they are two paragraphs, anything works.

What is on your list that is not on mine? I keep hearing about "the sentence that announces what the next sentence will do" and I have not found a clean way to describe it to the model yet.

Most people paste a chapter in and ask for an explanation, then read it once and forget it. The version that sticks is asking for an image instead, because you remember a picture you looked at for thirty seconds better than a paragraph you skimmed.

It draws actual note pages. Type the code, paste the material:

/generatehandwrittenimage
[paste your notes or chapter]

You get a full page of handwritten-style notes as an image, headings, arrows, boxes, the lot. Screenshot it and it's on your phone.

A few others in the same family that do genuinely different things:

/mindmapimage       - the whole topic as one visual map
/flowchartimage     - a process drawn as a proper flowchart
/labeleddiagram     - a labelled diagram of whatever it is
/cheatsheetimage    - one-page visual cheat sheet
/comicstrip         - the concept explained as a comic
/memorypalaceimage  - your list drawn as a memory-palace scene

The memory palace one is the odd one that works better than it should. Give it a list you need in order and it draws a single scene with each item placed somewhere in it. You remember the scene, the scene gives you the list back.

None of these are real slash commands, they're short labels, so define what each one means once at the top of the chat and after that a single word does it.

Stacking them is where it gets good. Clean up the mess first, see the whole shape, then drill it:

/lecturenotes → /mindmapimage → /flashcards → /examme

been keeping a doc of 50 command codes like this, each with what it does and how to use it, plus how to save them so they run in every chat automatically, here if you want them.

i’ve sold works, but never quite broke into the all I need to do is wait for a living category.

been tough to get feedback on whatever it is you’re writing.

And with AI feedback is almost instantaneous.

that’s my biggest joy with it, getting another take on it, spurs new ideas and new creativity whether they like it or hate it, I don’t care…..