← Về thư mục
📄 / / root / ceo-project / academic-research-skills / skills / academic-paper / references / writing_quality_check.md

Writing Quality Check

Purpose

A set of writing quality rules extracted from common patterns in AI-generated text. These are good writing rules that apply regardless of whether the text was AI-generated or human-written. The goal is better prose, not detection evasion.

Design boundary: This checklist improves writing quality. It is NOT a humanizer. We do not aim to fool AI detectors. We aim to produce clear, precise, varied academic prose.

Reference this checklist during the self-review step of drafting (draft_writer_agent Step 2.7, report_compiler_agent final check).


A. High-Frequency Term Warnings

The following terms appear disproportionately in AI-generated text. They are not banned — but when you encounter one, ask: "Is this really the most precise word here, or am I defaulting to it?"

Flagged Terms

Term Why it's flagged Better alternatives (context-dependent)
delve Overused as "explore" substitute examine, investigate, analyze, explore
tapestry Cliché metaphor for complexity network, interplay, system, landscape
landscape Vague when not literal field, domain, context, state of
pivotal Inflation of importance important, significant, central, key
crucial Same as above essential, necessary, critical, vital
foster Vague verb promote, develop, cultivate, encourage
showcase Non-academic register demonstrate, illustrate, present, reveal
testament Cliché evidence, indicator, demonstration
navigate Vague when not literal manage, address, handle, negotiate
leverage Business jargon use, employ, utilize, apply
realm Archaic/poetic domain, field, area, sphere
embark Overwrought for "begin" begin, initiate, undertake, start
underscore Overused emphasis verb emphasize, highlight, stress, reinforce
multifaceted Vague complexity claim complex, varied, diverse, multilayered
nuanced Often vacuous subtle, detailed, fine-grained, qualified
comprehensive Often unjustified thorough, extensive, broad, detailed
robust Vague quality claim reliable, strong, rigorous, resilient
intricate Same problem as multifaceted complex, detailed, elaborate, involved
cornerstone Cliché metaphor foundation, basis, core element, pillar
paradigm Overused outside philosophy of science framework, model, approach (exception: "paradigm shift" in philosophy of science is standard)
synergy Business jargon interaction, cooperation, combined effect
holistic Vague without definition comprehensive, integrated, whole-system
streamline Non-academic simplify, optimize, improve efficiency
cutting-edge Cliché recent, advanced, state-of-the-art, novel
groundbreaking Inflation novel, innovative, pioneering, original

Exception Rule

If a flagged term is standard terminology in the target discipline, it is exempt: - "paradigm shift" in philosophy of science → OK - "landscape" in ecology/geography (literal) → OK - "robust" in statistics ("robust estimator") → OK - "navigate" in wayfinding research (literal) → OK


B. Punctuation Pattern Control

Em Dash (—)

Semicolons

Colon-List Sequences


C. Throat-Clearing Openers

Delete the following sentence starters. Cut to the point.

Throat-clearing phrase What to do
"In the realm of..." Delete. Start with the actual subject
"It's important to note that..." Delete. If it's important, the content speaks for itself
"It is worth mentioning that..." Same as above
"In today's rapidly evolving..." Delete. Timestamped clichés add no information
"This serves as a testament to..." Replace with direct claim: "This demonstrates..." or just state the evidence
"It goes without saying that..." If it goes without saying, don't say it
"In order to..." Replace with "To..."
"It should be noted that..." Delete. Just note it
"As a matter of fact..." Delete. State the fact
"When it comes to..." Replace with the subject directly: "X shows..."
"At the end of the day..." Delete. Colloquial and vague
"With that being said..." Delete or use "However" if a contrast is intended

Meta-Commentary to Avoid

Also watch for sentences that describe what the paper is doing instead of doing it: - "This section will discuss..." → Just discuss it - "The following paragraph examines..." → Just examine it - "We now turn our attention to..." → Just turn to it

Exception: Roadmap sentences in the Introduction ("Section 2 reviews the literature; Section 3 describes the methodology") are standard academic practice and should be kept.


D. Structure Pattern Warnings

Rule of Three Compulsion

Uniform Paragraph Length

Synonym Cycling

Binary Contrast Overuse

Mirror Structure


E. Burstiness (Sentence Length Variation)

What to Check

Good writing has natural variation in sentence length. Short sentences create impact. Longer sentences develop complex ideas. The alternation creates rhythm.

Detection Rule

If 5+ consecutive sentences all fall within a narrow word-count range (e.g., all between 20-25 words): flag for review.

How to Fix

Burstiness Targets (by section)


How to Use This Checklist

During Drafting (Preferred)

Apply rules while writing each section in the self-review sub-step (Step 2.7 in draft_writer_agent). This catches issues before they propagate.

During Final Review (Fallback)

If not applied during drafting, run a full-paper sweep before handoff to citation_compliance_agent.

Scoring (Internal, Not Reported to User)

For each rule category, track violations: - 0 violations: Clean - 1-3 violations: Minor — fix in self-review - 4+ violations: Pattern issue — review the section's writing approach

Do NOT report scores to the user. Just fix the issues silently during drafting.