Install
$ agentstack add skill-renefichtmueller-slop-radar-superpowers-skill ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Slop Radar
Scan text for AI-generated writing patterns before finalizing output.
When to Use
- After generating documentation, READMEs, blog posts, or any prose
- When reviewing or editing written content
- Before committing markdown files
- When user asks to "check for slop", "check quality", or "make it sound human"
- Automatically after creating any substantial text output (500+ words)
How It Works
- Buzzword scan: Check against 245 English and 127 German AI phrases
- Structural patterns: Detect em-dash abuse, "Let me" starters, bullet overload, passive voice density, triple-adjective stacking, hedge phrases
- Score: 0-100 scale (100 = fully human, 0 = pure AI slop)
Instructions
When triggered, analyze the text (from $ARGUMENTS file path or the most recently generated prose):
Step 1: Identify the text to check
If $ARGUMENTS is a file path, read that file. Otherwise, check the most recently generated text output in the conversation.
Step 2: Run the slop scan
Check the text against these pattern categories:
Buzzwords (deduct 2 points each): "dive deep", "transformative", "journey", "landscape", "leverage", "cutting-edge", "holistic", "empower", "stakeholders", "synergy", "unprecedented", "robust", "streamline", "innovative", "paradigm", "ecosystem", "scalable", "game-changer", "best-in-class", "actionable", "at the end of the day", "in today's fast-paced", "it's worth noting", "moreover", "furthermore", "crucial", "pivotal", "seamless", "comprehensive", "elevate", "foster", "harness", "spearhead", "drive", "unlock", "reimagine", "navigate the complexities", "delve into", "underscore"
Structural Patterns (deduct 3-5 points each):
- Sentences starting with "Let me..." or "Here's the thing..."
- Em-dash abuse (more than 1 per 200 words)
- Triple bullet point lists where a paragraph would work
- Passive voice density above 30%
- Paragraphs ending with punchy one-liners
- "Not X -- it's Y" contrast structures
- Rhetorical question followed by immediate answer
Bonuses (add points):
- +5 for natural sentence length variation
- +5 for concrete numbers, names, or specific examples
- +3 for conversational tone without being forced
Step 3: Calculate and report score
Score: [X]/100 [RATING]
Rating scale:
90-100 HUMAN Clean, natural writing
70-89 MOSTLY CLEAN Minor AI signals
50-69 SUSPICIOUS Multiple AI patterns
30-49 LIKELY AI Strong AI writing signals
0-29 PURE SLOP Heavy buzzword and pattern use
Step 4: Show flagged items with replacements
For each flagged buzzword or pattern, suggest a concrete replacement:
| Found | Replacement | |-------|-------------| | "leverage" | "use" | | "cutting-edge" | (name the specific technology) | | "stakeholders" | (name the actual people: "customers", "engineers") | | "it's worth noting that" | (delete -- just state the thing) | | "dive deep into" | "look at" or "examine" | | "transformative" | (describe the actual change) | | "comprehensive" | (be specific about what it covers) | | "seamless" | (describe the actual experience) | | "robust" | (state what makes it reliable) | | "innovative" | (describe what is actually new) |
Step 5: Offer to rewrite
If score is below 70, offer to rewrite the flagged sections with concrete, specific language. Apply these principles:
- Replace vague adjectives with specific facts
- Replace buzzwords with plain words
- Break formulaic structures
- Add concrete examples where generalities exist
- Use active voice with named subjects
Example Output
Slop Radar Results
------------------
Score: 42/100 LIKELY AI
Buzzwords (8 found):
"transformative", "leverage", "cutting-edge", "holistic",
"stakeholders", "ecosystem", "seamless", "robust"
Patterns (3 found):
- Let-me starter (line 1)
- Em-dash overuse (4 in 200 words)
- Punchy one-liner ending (line 12)
Suggested rewrites provided for 11 items.
Rewrite flagged sections? [y/n]
Integration
For automated checking, slop-radar is available as a CLI tool:
npx slop-radar check # Full analysis
npx slop-radar score # Score only
npx slop-radar json # Machine-readable output
License
MIT
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: renefichtmueller
- Source: renefichtmueller/slop-radar
- License: MIT
- Homepage: https://slop-radar-demo.pages.dev
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.