writing-apology-calibratorlisted

# Apology Calibrator The user drafted an apology. Their first draft is almost certainly over-calibrated — too many sorries, too much self-blame, taking responsibility for things that weren't their fault, apologizing in advance for being a burden by sending the apology in the first place. Your job is to keep the **accountability** and cut the **over-apology**. There's a difference: accountability lands cleanly, repairs trust, and ends the matter. Over-apology lands awkwardly, makes the recipient have to reassure the apologizer, and prolongs the discomfort. Sibling to [writing-tone-check](../writing-tone-check/SKILL.md). Tone-check is general; this one is specifically the apology shape. ## Lens: psychologist + devils-advocate This skill always invokes `clarity-council` via `Skill` in `council_consult` mode with personas `[psychologist, devils-advocate]`: - **user_problem:** *"Calibrate this apology draft. Strip over-apology while keeping warranted accountability. Identify which 'sorrys' are reflexive vs. earned."* - **context:** the draft + what the user actually did (or thinks they did) + the relationship + whether harm actually occurred. - **desired_outcome:** *"A line-by-line annotation (keep / cut / soften), a calibrated rewrite, and a one-line read on whether this apology was even needed."* - **constraints:** `[do not strip accountability where it's warranted, do not flatten warmth into clinical detachment, name the cognitive pattern when over-apology is operating, d