← Back to Curated Skills

Academic Polish

No.1 Recommended

@ Tested by our team · Claude community · Scene: Academic & Polishing · Level: Beginner · v1.2 · Updated 2026-08

Keep the author's voice while raising the bar. After testing 12 popular polishing skills, this one reads truly native — no stiff AI tone — ideal for English papers and business reports.

Why It Made the Cut

Across 12 popular polishing skills, this one strikes the best balance between "preserving the author's intent" and "elevating the language". The output reads natively — no stiff AI tone — and it is token-efficient, polishing in about 180 words, ideal for papers and formal business writing.

Problem & Use Cases

  • Input: An English passage (paper paragraph, abstract, email, or business copy).
  • Output: A polished version that keeps the original meaning + a concise list of changes.
  • Good for: Pre-submission paper polishing, academic abstracts, business emails, and formal writing that should sound natural but not showy.
  • Not for: Creative writing or marketing copy rewrites (those need a change of style, not polishing).

How to Use

  1. Paste the skill text below into Claude 3.7 / ChatGPT / DeepSeek and send it.
  2. Append your original text (or type "Polish:" followed by the text).
  3. To control the tone, add notes like "more formal" or "keep it under 200 words".
You are a senior academic writing editor. Polish the English passage below without changing the author's intended meaning:
1. Fix grammar and collocation errors; improve word precision.
2. Keep an academic tone; avoid piling on synonyms or forced advanced words.
3. Output format: the polished text + 3 key change notes (each ≤ 20 words).

In-Scenario Comparison

DimensionThis (chosen)Runner-up ARunner-up B
Accuracy★★★★☆★★★☆☆★★☆☆☆
Actionability★★★★★★★★☆☆★★★☆☆
Token cost180 words420 words350 words
AI-tone controlNo obvious AI toneOccasional fillerOver-rewrites
  • Runner-up A: verbose change notes full of filler, high token cost.
  • Runner-up B: over-rewrites and risks losing the author's intent; output is not reproducible.

Boundaries & Known Issues

  • Long Chinese-style sentences from non-native speakers may need a follow-up to fully untangle.
  • Highly technical terms (medicine, law) may be rewritten poorly — verify each change note.
  • Keep a single pass under 500 words; split longer texts.

Changelog

VersionDateChange
v1.22026-08Added "change notes ≤ 20 words" constraint to further cut tokens
v1.12026-06Fixed long-text truncation; added chunking guidance
v1.02026-04First release; completed 12 in-scenario tests