Skip to content
All Skills

Unslop Commit

Rewrites commit messages so they sound like a careful human engineer wrote them. Strips AI/marketing slop ("comprehensive solution", "robust implementation", "leverage", "enhance", "seamlessly", "This commit..."). Keeps Conventional Commits format. Subject ≤72 chars (aim ≤50), imperative mood. Body only when "why" isn't obvious from the subject. Use when user says "humanize commit", "de-slop commit message", "make this commit sound human", "/unslop-commit", "/commit", "write a commit", or pastes a draft commit to clean up. Auto-triggers when staging changes.

Software Engineering|v1|Updated 7/14/2026|GitHub source
MCP get_skill({ skillId: "unslop-commit-f5d1146d" })

Use this skill with your agent

Create a free account and connect via MCP

Get Started Free
# Unslop Commit

## Purpose

Generate or rewrite commit messages so they read like a real engineer wrote them at the end of a real day. Conventional Commits format. Direct, specific, no template English. Why over what.

## Trigger

`/unslop-commit`, `/commit`, "write a commit", "commit message", "humanize this commit", "de-slop this commit". Auto-trigger when the user has staged changes and asks for a commit message.

## Rules

### Subject line

- Format: `<type>(<scope>): <imperative summary>`
- Scope optional. Types: `feat`, `fix`, `chore`, `refactor`, `docs`, `test`, `perf`, `build`, `ci`, `revert`.
- Imperative mood: `add`, `fix`, `move`, `remove` — not `added`, `fixes`, `fixing`.
- ≤50 chars when possible. Hard cap 72.
- No trailing period.
- Lowercase after `:` unless the project capitalizes.

### Body (only when subject can't carry it)

- Add for: non-obvious "why", breaking changes, migrations, security context, data integrity.
- Wrap at 72 chars. Bullets `-` for two or more independent points. Single paragraph for one thought.
- End with refs: `Closes #42`, `Refs #17`. No `BREAKING CHANGE:` unless truly breaking — and then write it.

### Never include

- Template prefixes: "This commit...", "This change...", "We are...", "I have..."
- Marketing verbs: comprehensive, robust, enhance, leverage, seamless, holistic
- Filler adverbs: just, really, basically, simply, actually
- Restating the filename when scope already names it
- "As requested by..." (use `Co-authored-by:` if you need attribution)
- AI attribution unless the project requires it
- Emoji unless project convention says so

### Auto-clarity (always include body)

- Breaking changes
- Security fixes
- Data migrations
- Reverts (cite the reverted commit)

## Examples

### Bad → good (slop subject, no body)

- Bad: `feat: implement a comprehensive, robust solution for user profile retrieval with enhanced error handling`
- Good: `feat(api): return profile fields the mobile client actually needs`

### Bad → good (vague body)

Bad:
```
fix: fixed the bug

This commit addresses an issue where the application was not working correctly
in some edge cases. We've improved the logic to handle these scenarios.
```

Good:
```
fix(checkout): ignore stale cart id from localStorage

Stale cart ids came from tabs that hadn't refreshed after a deploy. Server
now treats unknown ids as empty cart instead of 500.

Closes #842
```

### Breaking change

```
feat(api)!: rename /v1/orders to /v1/customer-orders

The old route stays in place until the next major release but logs a
deprecation warning. Internal services have been migrated.

BREAKING CHANGE: third-party integrations using /v1/orders directly need
to switch to /v1/customer-orders by 2026-07-01.

Closes #1290
```

## Boundaries

- Output the message only, in a single fenced block, ready to paste.
- Do not run `git commit`, stage, or amend.
- If the change is genuinely trivial (`docs(readme): fix typo`), keep it trivial. Don't pad.
- Never invent context the user didn't provide. If the "why" isn't clear, ask, or omit the body.
#broad-capability#content-quality#version#control

Related Skills

More skills in Software Engineering

Accessibility Standards

Comprehensive web accessibility standards based on WCAG 2.2 AA, with 38+ anti-patterns, legal enforcement context (EAA, ADA Title II), WAI-ARIA patterns, and framework-specific fixes for modern web frameworks and libraries.

#github-copilot#accessibilityMIT

Accord

Authoring unified specification packages across Business/Development/Design teams via staged elaboration (L0 Vision → L1 Requirements → L2 Team Detail → L3 Acceptance Criteria). No code. Use when authoring cross-team specs, building L0-L3 packages, or aligning Biz/Dev/Design on a single source of truth.

#broad-capability#developmentMIT

Acquire Codebase Knowledge

Use this skill when the user explicitly asks to map, document, or onboard into an existing codebase. Trigger for prompts like "map this codebase", "document this architecture", "onboard me to this repo", or "create codebase docs". Do not trigger for routine feature implementation, bug fixes, or narrow code edits unless the user asks for repository-level discovery.

#github-copilot#documentationMIT

Acreadiness Assess

Run the AgentRC readiness assessment on the current repository and produce a static HTML dashboard at reports/index.html. Wraps `npx github:microsoft/agentrc readiness` and hands off rendering to the @ai-readiness-reporter custom agent. Supports policies (--policy) for org-specific scoring. Use when asked to assess, audit, or score the AI readiness of a repo.

#github-copilot#planningMIT

Acreadiness Generate Instructions

Generate tailored AI agent instruction files via AgentRC instructions command. Produces .github/copilot-instructions.md (default, recommended for Copilot in VS Code) plus optional per-area .instructions.md files with applyTo globs for monorepos. Use after running /acreadiness-assess to close gaps in the AI Tooling pillar.

#github-copilot#skillMIT

Acreadiness Policy

Help the user pick, write, or apply an AgentRC policy. Policies customise readiness scoring by disabling irrelevant checks, overriding impact/level, setting pass-rate thresholds, or chaining org baselines with team overrides. Use when the user asks about strict mode, AI-only scoring, custom weights, CI gating, or wants org-wide standardisation.

#github-copilot#planningMIT