joy-check

Featured

Validate content framing on joy-grievance spectrum.

AI & Automation 419 stars 44 forks Updated 2 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 95/100

Stars 20%
87
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Joy Check Validate content framing using mode-specific rubrics. Two modes: - **writing** — Joy-grievance spectrum for human-facing content (blog posts, emails, articles). Evaluates whether content frames experiences through curiosity and generosity rather than grievance and accusation. - **instruction** — Positive framing validation for LLM-facing content (agents, skills, pipelines). Evaluates whether instructions tell the reader what to do rather than what to avoid (ADR-127). By default the skill evaluates each paragraph/instruction independently, produces a score (0-100), and suggests reframes without modifying content. Optional flags: `--fix` rewrites flagged items in place and re-verifies; `--strict` fails on any item below 60; `--mode writing|instruction` overrides auto-detection. This skill checks *framing*, not *topic* and not *voice*. Voice fidelity belongs to voice-validator, AI pattern detection belongs to the private de-AI editor skill. ## Reference Loading Table | Signal | Load These Files | Why | |---|---|---| | scoring instruction files (agents, skills, pipelines): positive-framing rubric | `instruction-rubric.md` | Loads detailed guidance from `instruction-rubric.md`. | | scoring human-facing prose (blog posts, emails, docs): joy-grievance rubric | `writing-rubric.md` | Loads detailed guidance from `writing-rubric.md`. | ## Instructions ### Phase 0: DETECT MODE **Goal**: Determine which rubric to apply based on file location or explicit flag. **Auto...

Details

Author
notque
Repository
notque/vexjoy-agent
Created
5 months ago
Last Updated
2 days ago
Language
Python
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

content-quality-check

Editorial QA pass that catches AI tells, template language, hollow hedges, weak closers, and brand-voice violations in any draft before it publishes. Runs a deterministic linter (slop phrases, LLM-overrepresented words, "not just X, it's Y" reframes, em-dash chaining, rhetorical-question openers, announcement cliches, the brand's own Avoid list) and then an editorial judgment pass (throat-clearing openers, closers that restate the open, claims without proof, specificity, voice-pillar conformance). Reports findings by severity with line references and a fix per flag; rewrites only on request. Use whenever the user says "review this draft", "QA this post", "check for AI tells", "does this sound AI-written", "editorial review", "content quality check", "de-slop this", or is about to publish copy. Enforces the standard that brand-voice-guide builds; works standalone with the universal checklist when no voice directory exists.

0 Updated 6 days ago
esmefong
Code & Development Listed

clear-and-human

Construct, review, score, and rewrite written content so it reads like a specific human wrote it, not an AI. Use this skill whenever the user wants to: write or draft prose for humans (docs, README, runbook, ADR, PR/commit message, blog post, LinkedIn post, email, Slack message, or a spoken explainer/tutorial video script); humanize or de-slop AI-generated text; check whether writing "sounds like AI"; review a draft for AI texture; rewrite content in their own voice; score a draft for authenticity or clarity; or tighten and sharpen prose. Also trigger on "humanize", "make it sound human", "sounds like AI", "does this sound like AI", "voice check", "review my draft", "rewrite in my voice", "tighten this up", "edit for clarity", "video script", "explainer script". Auto-detects content type and applies channel-specific rules. Defaults to a neutral, factual voice and never invents specifics to add texture. For deliberately persuasive marketing copy (ads, hooks, LinkedIn/Bluesky growth posts, video titles and thum

8 Updated 5 days ago
kevin-burns
AI & Automation Listed

a11y-content-judgment

Load this skill when an audit needs the judgment-shaped WCAG criteria that scanners cannot decide — are page titles, headings, form labels, link text in context, and image alternatives actually useful, meaningful, and descriptive for the person relying on them (2.4.2, 2.4.6, 2.4.4, 1.1.1), and is navigation consistent across pages (3.2.3, 3.2.4)? It inventories every such element across a URL list, attaches deterministic heuristic flags, has a model draft a per-row judgment with a rationale, and hands the rows to a named human ratifier as a CSV. Output is always a DRAFT; a row becomes a criterion outcome only when a human ratifies it. Never use it to flip an outcome-map cell, to judge criteria that need interaction or assistive technology, or as a substitute for a11y-test's measurement.

8 Updated 2 days ago
zivtech