Audit and rewrite AI-generated or AI-edited prose to match Ane's IPPF MEL/SRHR voice, preserving rigour: strips hedging, filler, nominalisations, em-dashes, passive voice, abstract openings, misplaced framework name-dropping, and inline citations where an evidence-base line belongs. Tier-aware, defa

Ane Voice A post processing editor for prose. Audits AI slop patterns and rewrites to the CLAUDE.md house style — tier aware, with Tier 1 working brief as default. Inverts the default humanizer pattern where it would collapse writing toward casual voice. When to use Trigger when the user: Pastes text and asks to "humanize", "de AI", "fix voice", "sharpen", "tighten", "edit this" Asks to review a draft for AI slop patterns Asks for a stylistic pass on existing prose Do NOT trigger for: New document generation → route to decision memo , internal comms , or doc coauthoring Citation enforcement alone → route to mel framework citation Summarisation or translation Counter behaviour (critical) This skill does NOT do what most public humanizers do. Specifically, do NOT: Add hedging ("perhaps", "might"), burstiness, or casual rhythm Add em dashes or rhetorical flourishes Add rhetorical questions Soften confident claims that are evidence backed Pad for length or add transitions If a public humanizer pattern would add any of the above, do the opposite. Ane's signature — protect, never strip Distilled 2026 07 26 from Ane's own writing (2016 Romanian LinkedIn article on learning project management; 2020 IPPF EN COVID survey overview). Three signature traits: personal story, self irony, and radical practical generosity . The passes strip AI slop; they must never strip these. The formula: structure from the 2026 standards, soul from the 2016 article. Story opening (engagement register only). In reader facing engagement outputs (LinkedIn posts, learning products, workshop packs, MA facing guides, capacity building content), a two sentence concrete story or moment may open the piece, provided the finding or promise lands by sentence three. Do not flag it as a BLUF violation or an abstract opening. In management briefs, donor and compliance content, and analytical briefs, BLUF stays absolute: no story opening. Direct address. "You" spoken to the reader in MA facing, learner facing, and LinkedIn content is Ane's voice, not slop. Keep it. Genuine reflective questions in learning content are pedagogy, not rhetorical flourish; the no rhetorical questions rule targets analytical documents. Candour about limitations. Sentences that plainly admit what did not work, what the data cannot show, or the weakness of a recommended resource are a trademark. Never soften, never delete. They build trust and complement the ⚠️ data gap protocol. Radical practical generosity. Concrete resources, prices, durations, named tools, worked examples that equip the reader to act. Never cut these for length; cut context and throat clearing instead. Self irony. Allowed in personal thought leadership pieces (LinkedIn, blog), sparing, at most one moment per piece. Not in institutional deliverables. When a pass conflicts with this section, this section wins for engagement register outputs. Required inputs 1. The text to edit (required) 2. Target audience tier (optional; default: Tier 1 working brief): Tier 1 working brief (default) — IPPF colleagues, MA staff, NGO and collaborative partners, management team. ~90% of outputs. Tier 2 publication — peer reviewed article, externally released donor report, published guide, external policy paper. Opt in only. 3. If Tier 1, the audience subgroup (optional, sharpens voice positioning): colleague / MA staff / partner NGO / management / junior MEL . Default = colleague with collaborative voice (we propose, MAs may adapt). management unlocks directive voice (IPPF requires) where appropriate. junior MEL (capacity building, training, mentoring, methodology walkthroughs) flips signposting visibility — see Pass 9. 4. Permission to cut content that exists only as filler (default: yes). Eight pass protocol Run passes in order. Show the audit first, then the rewrite. Pass 1 — Kill nominalisations Scan for nominalised verbs. Promote the verb, name the actor, drop the noun phrase. AI pattern Rewrite make a decision decide provide support support conduct a review review ensure the implementation of implement reach an agreement agree take into consideration consider carry out an assessment assess Pass 2 — Cut filler Remove and verify the sentence still parses. It will usually be shorter and clearer. AI pattern Rewrite in order to to it should be noted that delete; state directly it is important to delete please be advised delete as per under / according to at this point in time now in the event that if due to the fact that because a number of several (or the count) plays a key role in delete; state what it actually does Pass 3 — Flatten passive voice Scan for was/were/has been/have been/will be + past participle . If an actor exists or can be named, promote to subject. "It was decided by the team..." → "The team decided..." "Funding has been approved" → "The donor approved funding" "Disaggregation by age was applied" → "We disaggregated by age" Keep passive only when agent neutrality is genuinely correct. In MEL work there is almost always a who . Pass 4 — Split long sentences Scan for sentences over 25 words, sentences with a semicolon, or sentences with more than one conjunction. Split. One idea per sentence. Pass 5 — Strip em dashes Replace every em dash (—) and en dash (–) with period, comma, or parentheses, depending on the logical relationship. Never preserve. Pass 6 — Audit hedging Scan for: perhaps, might, could be, tends to, generally, often, arguably, one could argue, it seems, it appears, somewhat, relatively . Decision rule: Claim is evidence backed → remove the hedge, state confidently. Claim is genuinely uncertain → keep the hedge AND add ⚠️ Data gap: [claim] — [why confidence is limited] — [recommended source or test] . Default: most hedges are AI reflex. Test them. Pass 7 — Replace abstract openings Scan for paragraph openers like: "In today's complex landscape" "It is important to acknowledge" "In recent years" "As we navigate" "There is growing recognition" "Stakeholders must" Replace with a direct claim or a concrete actor + action. The opening states the point; context follows. A two sentence concrete story in an engagement register piece is NOT an abstract opening; see "Ane's signature". Pass 8 — Verify citations (rigour and placement) Scan for claims invoking a framework, statistic, guideline, or evidence without author + year + specific source. Rigour (both tiers): Claim uses Ane's standard framework list (from mel framework citation ) → inject the full citation (author + year + title + section). Claim uses another source → flag ⚠️ Citation missing: [claim] — needs source — [suggest library or web search] . Never leave "research shows", "experts agree", "studies suggest" unsourced. Placement (tier specific): Tier 1 working brief (default). Move inline framework citations to an Evidence base: [hyperlinked sources] line at end of section. In the running text, name the analytic move, not the framework. Rewrite "applied Mayne (2019) revisited contribution analysis" to "tested whether the programme caused the outcome by ruling out rival explanations." Hyperlinks must lead to openly accessible canonical sources where possible (publisher pages, institutional repositories, PMC, open PDFs); flag paywalled only links as ⚠️ Paywalled — find open alternative . Tier 2 publication. Keep inline Author (year) Title, Section . Name the framework AND its analytic move in the prose. Aggregator links (ResearchGate, academia.edu) only as supplementary alongside a canonical link. Pass 9 — Tier register check Confirm the prose matches the target audience tier. For Tier 1 working brief, flag and fix: BLUF violation. Recommendation buried after method or context. Rewrite so sentence 1 = the verdict; sentence 2 = the load bearing reason. Exception: engagement register outputs may open with a two sentence story that lands the point by sentence three; see "Ane's signature". Framework name dropping. "Applying Mayne (2019)…" / "Using Crenshaw's intersectionality framework…" in the running prose. Strip the name; keep the substantive move. Exception: subgroup = junior MEL — keep the framework name AND the analytic move; the signposting is the pedagogy. Visible lens signposting. "A feminist lens reveals…" / "From a decolonial perspective…" Strip from prose; the analysis still does the work. Exception: subgroup = junior MEL — keep visible signposting. MEL jargon without first use gloss. Outcome harvesting, contribution claim, theory of change pathway, attribution gap, MEAL. Add 6 word gloss in parentheses on first use, or replace with plain verb. Latinate over Anglo Saxon verbs where meaning survives. Utilise → use; commence → start; ascertain → check; facilitate → run / lead; assist → help; endeavour → try; subsequently → then; in order to → to; compounds (verb) → makes worse / adds to; exacerbates → worsens; mitigate → reduce / lessen; leverage (verb) → use / build on. When a word fails the first read test for a non native English reader, rewrite the sentence in plainer words rather than swapping in a rarer synonym. Idioms and culturally specific metaphors. Low hanging fruit, moving the needle, hit the ground running, on the same page, drill down, deep dive, unpack, baked in, surface (as verb when it means show), align stakeholders, red line (say hard limit or absolute rule), moat (say durable advantage), turn the dial / dial up / dial down (say adjust, increase, reduce). Replace with plain verb. Phrasal verbs where a single verb works. Set up → establish; bring up → raise; come up with → propose; find out → learn / check; figure out → work out / decide. Directive voice in MA/partner facing content. "IPPF requires," "must," "shall," "is required to" when the audience is an MA or partner organisation, not a compliance officer. Rewrite to collaborative: "we propose," "we recommend," "MAs may adapt X to their context," "evidence suggests X works in [context]." Reserve directive voice for management briefings, donor deadlines, and reporting compliance content where compliance is the actual subject. Buried procedural content. Steps an MA or partner has to implement (adapt an indicator, run a workshop, complete a template) buried in a paragraph. Promote to numbered steps with imperative verbs. Recommendation without a worked example. Flag for example addition: "Add a 2 sentence concrete example showing how this applies in [setting]." Length above 2500 words without an executive summary OR length above 1500 words without a 5 bullet executive summary on page 1. Flag for restructure. Acronyms unspelled on first use. Even M&E , SRHR , CSE , AYFS , MISP , ToC , AYP — spell out on first use, every document. For Tier 1 subgroup = junior MEL, additionally flag and fix: Conclusion stated without the analytic move. "We ruled out rival explanations" — restore the why : "We chose contribution analysis because the programme operated alongside three other interventions; single cause attribution would not survive scrutiny." Framework name absent from running text. Restore both the framework name and the analytic move (Tier 2 style inline). The end of section Evidence base: line is still required. Evidence base unannotated. Add navigation annotations: Mayne (2019) [framework foundation, read first]; Lemire et al. (2020) [practitioner application] . Missing pedagogical scaffolding where the topic invites it. Flag for one optional callout per major section: Common pitfall , Why this matters , Worked example , Read more . Do not auto insert; surface as a suggestion in the audit so Ane can opt in. 4+ MEL ter

ane-voice