# Anti Defensive Writing

Remove audit, defensive, self-critical, developer-facing and commitment writing from...

- Repository: https://github.com/Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills (646 stars)
- Category: Data and ML
- License: MIT
- Last updated: 2026-10-13
- Runs scripts: no, instructions only

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills --skill anti-defensive-writing -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills --skill anti-defensive-writing -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills --skill anti-defensive-writing -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills --skill anti-defensive-writing -g -a gemini-cli -y`

## Description

Remove audit, defensive, self-critical, developer-facing and commitment writing from manuscripts, Supplementary Information, legends, table notes, data/code statements and figure content. Preserve numbers, definitions, reproducibility facts, mandated statistics, null results and conditions that determine reported values. What is load-bearing depends on the target venue: an ML conference needs the no-leakage sentence a journal pass might cut. Use after claim hierarchy is settled and before sentence polishing, when a draft reads like an audit report, rebuttal, self-critique or repository README, or on requests to de-audit, cut hedging, remove developer notes or promises, 去审计、审计味、防御性写作、自我批评、自我限制、评判式写作、去包装、太多免责、写得太怂、太啰嗦、让语气更肯定、面向开发人员、代码路径、文件名、事前承诺. Also prevents these voices from being added during editing.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# Anti-Defensive Writing

A research paper argues from evidence. It does not keep an audit log of its own project, argue with
an imagined reviewer, criticize itself, document its repository, or make promises. This skill removes
those voices from every part of the paper, Supplementary Information included, and keeps everything a
reader needs to understand, trust and reproduce the work.

The paper should feel controlled because the design is clear, not because the authors keep saying
that it is controlled.

Read **What stays** before deleting anything, and **Local integration** for where this skill sits in
the `paper-workflow` chain.

## Rule zero: do not add it

Most audit and defensive text is added during editing, not during drafting: an edit fixes an
ambiguity, answers a co-author or reviewer comment, or adds provenance "to be safe". While editing any
text:

- Add no qualifier, disclaimer or provenance note unless the sentence would otherwise be literally
  false.
- Fix an ambiguity with a precise definition, not with a caveat. "Labels A to D denote four dataset
  regimes" beats a sentence explaining what the labels should not be taken to mean.
- A request for a small change gets a small change: one sentence, not a protective paragraph around it.
- Do not weaken a claim in advance because a control or baseline is not yet in the draft. Whether a
  claim needs qualifying is decided when that evidence arrives.

## The six voices

Each voice has recognition cues and one fix. A cue is a candidate, not a verdict; classify it with the
procedure below before changing it.

### 1. Audit voice: the project's process leaking into the paper

The text reports how the work was run and checked instead of what it found. Typical cues:

The rest: https://github.com/Boom5426/Nature-Paper-Skills/blob/HEAD/skills/core/anti-defensive-writing/SKILL.md