docs-voice

To fix robotic documentation voice, scan Markdown files for passive phrasing, hedged language, jargon, and em-dashes, then apply rewrites that lead with user value. This removes verbose, AI-written patterns while preserving technical syntax.

Edit Markdown files by targeting lead paragraphs and repeated headings for passive phrasing and jargon, then proposing clearer alternatives. This process preserves existing cross-references, code blocks, and directive syntax during tone cleanup.

Yes, you can rewrite MyST markdown documentation without breaking cross-references. The voice review process specifically preserves existing cross-references, code blocks, and directive syntax while proposing tone improvements and rewrites.

The best way to review docs for tone before publishing is to scan for diminishing language, awkward preambles, and em-dashes. Use review-only feedback to quickly fix verbose issues that make documentation feel AI-written before applying changes.

Voice review provides review-only feedback by default to suggest changes. It distinguishes between proposing cleaner alternatives and performing in-place edits, only applying direct changes to the file when explicitly requested.

Documentation may still sound robotic if repeated headings, diminishing language, or hedged passive voice remain. Targeting these specific patterns and replacing em-dashes with direct phrasing ensures the text leads with user value.