Extract tweet style with one click
Featured by
nene@YouMind.AI
Why we love this skill
This skill can **extract tweet style with a single click**, transforming any author's X/Twitter writing habits into reusable style rules. It makes no subjective judgments, generating **executable style descriptions** solely based on the text, helping you easily replicate or maintain a specific writing style. Whether for personal branding or content team collaboration, it ensures **consistency and recognizability of output**.
Instructions
You are a "Twitter writing style extractor".
Your task is not to summarize the content, nor to give writing advice, but rather:
**From a group of tweets by the same author, summarize their stable and reproducible writing style rules. The final output is an "X Writing Style" document.**
====================
Analytical principles (very important)
====================
- Summarize solely based on the text itself, without incorporating external experience.
- Do not make judgments about "good" or "bad" or "right" or "wrong".
- No example sentences or direct quotes.
- All conclusions should be "actionable style descriptions," not subjective adjectives.
====================
Analysis Dimensions
====================
Please extract stylistic features from the following dimensions (not requiring coverage of every single feature, but focusing on the most stable and prominent parts of the text):
1. Introduction and Approach
- How a tweet usually starts
- Should we jump straight to the point and lay out the background, or present our viewpoint first?
- What function does the beginning serve in the whole?
2. Tone and Expression
- Overall tone leans towards: narration/dialogue/explanation/sharing
- Emotional intensity and stability
- Does the speaker adopt a certain fixed speaking posture (such as restraint, ease, prudence, etc.)?
3. Information organization methods
- Is there a clear order or rhythm in the unfolding of the content?
- Is the information given all at once, or gradually unfolded?
- Does a common structural path exist (e.g., description → action → result)?
4. Language and Sentence Structure Features
- Sentence length and sentence segmentation habits
Do you prefer short sentences, line breaks, and white space?
- Is the wording more concrete or abstract?
5. Expression of details and formal conventions
- Emoji usage (frequency, location, function)
- How to place links, supplementary information, and explanatory content
- Is there a fixed layout or visual rhythm?
6. Recurring language patterns
- Frequently occurring verbs, phrases, and modal particles
- Common ways to conclude or transition
- A distinctive personal style of expression
7. Length and Density
- Length range of a single tweet
- Overall tendency of information density (more compact/lighter)
====================
Output format (strictly adhere to)
====================
[One] A one-sentence style summary
Summarize the author's writing style on X/Twitter in one sentence (no more than 30 words).
【II】Core Style Rules (8–12 rules)
Output in the form of "rules", each of which should:
- Can be directly obeyed by humans or AI
- No examples included
- Does not contain value judgments
Format example (for format illustration only, not content example):
- The beginning is usually...
- Tends to express himself in a way that...
- Avoid tweets as a whole...
【III】Common Structural Outlines
Describe 2–3 common expansion paths using abstract structures, for example:
- A → B → C
- Description → Action → Supplement
[IV] List of Linguistic and Formal Features
List them separately:
- High-frequency language features (part of speech/tone level)
- Layout and formal characteristics
[V] Stylistic Boundaries
Describe which writing styles **clearly do not conform to** the author's style (no more than 5 examples).
====================
Precautions
====================
- Do not write it as an analysis report or essay.
- Avoid subjective expressions such as "appears" or "gives the impression".
- The output should be directly usable for "style reproduction" or "style consistency checks".
description
Like a professional analyst, extract the author's writing style from tweets. Accurately capture the writing style rules of X/Twitter, achieve style reproduction and consistency checks, and say goodbye to subjective assumptions.
Related Skills
View all
Academic Paper Three-Track Polishing System v2.0
Native-speaker editor-level paper polishing, three-track customized approach directly meeting top journal review standards. Three independent engines precisely align with your target submission model: A. Journal Benchmarking: Locking onto the style guidelines of top journals like Nature and IEEE, utilizing the journal's unique sentence structure preferences (Nature prefers active voice + interdisciplinary readability, IEEE prefers passive voice + high-density technical vocabulary), ensuring your draft directly matches the target journal's standard model. B. Model Article Replication: In-depth analysis of the sentence structure, conjunction preferences, and writing rhythm of your favorite benchmark articles, making your manuscript infinitely close to the top journal's model in language style. C. Pure Refinement: Activating universal top journal standards, performing four-dimensional foundation polishing (grammar correction, word restructuring, intonation unification, extreme clarity), significantly enhancing academic tension and readability. Surgical-level block-by-block refinement, every change is visible and logically enforced. Forced block processing (500-800 words each time) breaks through the AI attention window limitation, polishing sentence by sentence without roughness. Dual-core adversarial engine (Core A language restructuring + ... (Core B Quality Control) Transparent annotation throughout, outputting 3-5 editor-in-chief level revision notes each time, explaining "why this revision aligns with top journal preferences." Absolutely faithful semantics: only changes the expression, not the core content; never tamper with data or invent new viewpoints for you. After opening, directly select the polishing mode (A Journal Benchmark/B Sample Replication/C Pure Refinement), then paste your paper in paragraphs (500-800 words per paragraph is recommended, such as the first half of the introduction). The system will refine each paragraph with editor-in-chief annotations. After confirming there are no errors, proceed to the next paragraph. Fully interactive guidance, no complex configuration required. The accompanying tool, the official polishing module of the "Academic Paper Full-Process Writing System v3.1 (Wuyuan × AFP)," forms a complete closed loop from topic selection to drafting to final polishing. Applicable scenarios: Papers requested by reviewers to be "native-language polished," papers aiming for top journals like Nature/Science, and master's/doctoral students and young scholars wanting to learn the writing style of top journals. Key differences: Several times cheaper than hiring a polishing company, several times more accurate than AI-powered one-shot revisions, and several times more efficient than blind self-editing.
Academic Paper Writing System v3.0 (Wuyuan×AFP)
This academic paper writing system, integrating the Five-Source Model and AFP framework, provides a one-stop solution for the entire academic writing process, from initial observation to completion. ✅ Seven core modules: Topic Selection & Introduction → Literature Review → Research Methods → Discussion → Conclusion → Abstract & Keywords (new in v3.1) → Full Text Integration. Each stage is constrained by the Five-Source Model (structure + materials + style + integration + calibration). ✅ Stage-based diagnosis: The system automatically identifies your current writing stage (starting from scratch/already having a topic/already having a review, etc.) and jumps directly to the corresponding module, eliminating the need to start from the beginning. ✅ Anti-illusion firewall: It mandates the submission of real literature/data, with the B-core having veto power to reject any "illusionary content" without supporting materials, ensuring academic rigor. ✅ Interdisciplinary adaptation: It automatically identifies quantitative, qualitative, and speculative research paradigms and switches to corresponding writing strategies (e.g., quantitative analysis emphasizes "variable conflicts," while qualitative analysis emphasizes "failure of contextual explanatory power"), adapting to all disciplines from humanities and social sciences to STEM fields. After opening, simply tell the system "Which stage am I at?" + "My subject area" to start. The system will guide you through the process of submitting materials (literature/data/research ideas). Each completed module automatically generates usable chapter content, and finally, all are integrated into a complete paper with a single click. User feedback: 40% increase in C-level journal/SCI submission acceptance rate. v3.1 Major upgrade: Added Phase 6 abstract and keyword generation module, achieving a true closed-loop process from "topic selection → manuscript completion → abstract".
Thesis Topic Selection and Introduction Writing System v3.0 (Five-Source Model × AFP)
From vague ideas to complete topic selection, and then to high-quality introductions, the entire process is designed to prevent illusions. ✅ Stage-based diagnostic positioning—Whether you are in the stage of vague observation, research unit refinement, theoretical matching, or introduction writing, the system automatically identifies and starts from the corresponding stage, without having to start from scratch. ✅ Four-core collaborative quality control—A core generates content, B core reviews and rejects (with veto power!), C core evaluates innovativeness, and D core monitors the entire process, ensuring that every output conforms to academic norms. ✅ Anti-illusion firewall—Forced feeding of real literature to generate introductions, rejecting AI-fabricated citations, and all references must be traceable. ✅ Automatic switching of interdisciplinary methodologies—After recognizing your professional background, the system automatically calls the corresponding methodology (humanities and social sciences: Q-method, fantasy topic analysis; science, engineering, agriculture, and medicine: machine learning, multi-omics analysis), without requiring you to understand the details of the methodology. After opening the system and answering 3 questions (professional background/current stage/target journal), the system automatically determines which step to start from. Prepare the prefaces (including references) of 3-5 papers on the same topic as reference materials, and the system will generate a draft introduction that conforms to journal specifications based on real literature. The entire process involves collaboration among four core experts, with a second-tier expert reviewing at key stages. Submissions that fail to meet standards are immediately rejected and require revision. The program covers all disciplines in the humanities, social sciences, science, engineering, agriculture, and medicine, and is compatible with submissions to journals at all levels, including CSSCI, SCI, and Peking University core journals.
Extract tweet style with one click
Featured by
nene@YouMind.AI
Why we love this skill
This skill can **extract tweet style with a single click**, transforming any author's X/Twitter writing habits into reusable style rules. It makes no subjective judgments, generating **executable style descriptions** solely based on the text, helping you easily replicate or maintain a specific writing style. Whether for personal branding or content team collaboration, it ensures **consistency and recognizability of output**.
Instructions
You are a "Twitter writing style extractor".
Your task is not to summarize the content, nor to give writing advice, but rather:
**From a group of tweets by the same author, summarize their stable and reproducible writing style rules. The final output is an "X Writing Style" document.**
====================
Analytical principles (very important)
====================
- Summarize solely based on the text itself, without incorporating external experience.
- Do not make judgments about "good" or "bad" or "right" or "wrong".
- No example sentences or direct quotes.
- All conclusions should be "actionable style descriptions," not subjective adjectives.
====================
Analysis Dimensions
====================
Please extract stylistic features from the following dimensions (not requiring coverage of every single feature, but focusing on the most stable and prominent parts of the text):
1. Introduction and Approach
- How a tweet usually starts
- Should we jump straight to the point and lay out the background, or present our viewpoint first?
- What function does the beginning serve in the whole?
2. Tone and Expression
- Overall tone leans towards: narration/dialogue/explanation/sharing
- Emotional intensity and stability
- Does the speaker adopt a certain fixed speaking posture (such as restraint, ease, prudence, etc.)?
3. Information organization methods
- Is there a clear order or rhythm in the unfolding of the content?
- Is the information given all at once, or gradually unfolded?
- Does a common structural path exist (e.g., description → action → result)?
4. Language and Sentence Structure Features
- Sentence length and sentence segmentation habits
Do you prefer short sentences, line breaks, and white space?
- Is the wording more concrete or abstract?
5. Expression of details and formal conventions
- Emoji usage (frequency, location, function)
- How to place links, supplementary information, and explanatory content
- Is there a fixed layout or visual rhythm?
6. Recurring language patterns
- Frequently occurring verbs, phrases, and modal particles
- Common ways to conclude or transition
- A distinctive personal style of expression
7. Length and Density
- Length range of a single tweet
- Overall tendency of information density (more compact/lighter)
====================
Output format (strictly adhere to)
====================
[One] A one-sentence style summary
Summarize the author's writing style on X/Twitter in one sentence (no more than 30 words).
【II】Core Style Rules (8–12 rules)
Output in the form of "rules", each of which should:
- Can be directly obeyed by humans or AI
- No examples included
- Does not contain value judgments
Format example (for format illustration only, not content example):
- The beginning is usually...
- Tends to express himself in a way that...
- Avoid tweets as a whole...
【III】Common Structural Outlines
Describe 2–3 common expansion paths using abstract structures, for example:
- A → B → C
- Description → Action → Supplement
[IV] List of Linguistic and Formal Features
List them separately:
- High-frequency language features (part of speech/tone level)
- Layout and formal characteristics
[V] Stylistic Boundaries
Describe which writing styles **clearly do not conform to** the author's style (no more than 5 examples).
====================
Precautions
====================
- Do not write it as an analysis report or essay.
- Avoid subjective expressions such as "appears" or "gives the impression".
- The output should be directly usable for "style reproduction" or "style consistency checks".
description
Like a professional analyst, extract the author's writing style from tweets. Accurately capture the writing style rules of X/Twitter, achieve style reproduction and consistency checks, and say goodbye to subjective assumptions.
Related Skills
View allAcademic Paper Three-Track Polishing System v2.0
Native-speaker editor-level paper polishing, three-track customized approach directly meeting top journal review standards. Three independent engines precisely align with your target submission model: A. Journal Benchmarking: Locking onto the style guidelines of top journals like Nature and IEEE, utilizing the journal's unique sentence structure preferences (Nature prefers active voice + interdisciplinary readability, IEEE prefers passive voice + high-density technical vocabulary), ensuring your draft directly matches the target journal's standard model. B. Model Article Replication: In-depth analysis of the sentence structure, conjunction preferences, and writing rhythm of your favorite benchmark articles, making your manuscript infinitely close to the top journal's model in language style. C. Pure Refinement: Activating universal top journal standards, performing four-dimensional foundation polishing (grammar correction, word restructuring, intonation unification, extreme clarity), significantly enhancing academic tension and readability. Surgical-level block-by-block refinement, every change is visible and logically enforced. Forced block processing (500-800 words each time) breaks through the AI attention window limitation, polishing sentence by sentence without roughness. Dual-core adversarial engine (Core A language restructuring + ... (Core B Quality Control) Transparent annotation throughout, outputting 3-5 editor-in-chief level revision notes each time, explaining "why this revision aligns with top journal preferences." Absolutely faithful semantics: only changes the expression, not the core content; never tamper with data or invent new viewpoints for you. After opening, directly select the polishing mode (A Journal Benchmark/B Sample Replication/C Pure Refinement), then paste your paper in paragraphs (500-800 words per paragraph is recommended, such as the first half of the introduction). The system will refine each paragraph with editor-in-chief annotations. After confirming there are no errors, proceed to the next paragraph. Fully interactive guidance, no complex configuration required. The accompanying tool, the official polishing module of the "Academic Paper Full-Process Writing System v3.1 (Wuyuan × AFP)," forms a complete closed loop from topic selection to drafting to final polishing. Applicable scenarios: Papers requested by reviewers to be "native-language polished," papers aiming for top journals like Nature/Science, and master's/doctoral students and young scholars wanting to learn the writing style of top journals. Key differences: Several times cheaper than hiring a polishing company, several times more accurate than AI-powered one-shot revisions, and several times more efficient than blind self-editing.
Academic Paper Writing System v3.0 (Wuyuan×AFP)
This academic paper writing system, integrating the Five-Source Model and AFP framework, provides a one-stop solution for the entire academic writing process, from initial observation to completion. ✅ Seven core modules: Topic Selection & Introduction → Literature Review → Research Methods → Discussion → Conclusion → Abstract & Keywords (new in v3.1) → Full Text Integration. Each stage is constrained by the Five-Source Model (structure + materials + style + integration + calibration). ✅ Stage-based diagnosis: The system automatically identifies your current writing stage (starting from scratch/already having a topic/already having a review, etc.) and jumps directly to the corresponding module, eliminating the need to start from the beginning. ✅ Anti-illusion firewall: It mandates the submission of real literature/data, with the B-core having veto power to reject any "illusionary content" without supporting materials, ensuring academic rigor. ✅ Interdisciplinary adaptation: It automatically identifies quantitative, qualitative, and speculative research paradigms and switches to corresponding writing strategies (e.g., quantitative analysis emphasizes "variable conflicts," while qualitative analysis emphasizes "failure of contextual explanatory power"), adapting to all disciplines from humanities and social sciences to STEM fields. After opening, simply tell the system "Which stage am I at?" + "My subject area" to start. The system will guide you through the process of submitting materials (literature/data/research ideas). Each completed module automatically generates usable chapter content, and finally, all are integrated into a complete paper with a single click. User feedback: 40% increase in C-level journal/SCI submission acceptance rate. v3.1 Major upgrade: Added Phase 6 abstract and keyword generation module, achieving a true closed-loop process from "topic selection → manuscript completion → abstract".
Thesis Topic Selection and Introduction Writing System v3.0 (Five-Source Model × AFP)
From vague ideas to complete topic selection, and then to high-quality introductions, the entire process is designed to prevent illusions. ✅ Stage-based diagnostic positioning—Whether you are in the stage of vague observation, research unit refinement, theoretical matching, or introduction writing, the system automatically identifies and starts from the corresponding stage, without having to start from scratch. ✅ Four-core collaborative quality control—A core generates content, B core reviews and rejects (with veto power!), C core evaluates innovativeness, and D core monitors the entire process, ensuring that every output conforms to academic norms. ✅ Anti-illusion firewall—Forced feeding of real literature to generate introductions, rejecting AI-fabricated citations, and all references must be traceable. ✅ Automatic switching of interdisciplinary methodologies—After recognizing your professional background, the system automatically calls the corresponding methodology (humanities and social sciences: Q-method, fantasy topic analysis; science, engineering, agriculture, and medicine: machine learning, multi-omics analysis), without requiring you to understand the details of the methodology. After opening the system and answering 3 questions (professional background/current stage/target journal), the system automatically determines which step to start from. Prepare the prefaces (including references) of 3-5 papers on the same topic as reference materials, and the system will generate a draft introduction that conforms to journal specifications based on real literature. The entire process involves collaboration among four core experts, with a second-tier expert reviewing at key stages. Submissions that fail to meet standards are immediately rejected and require revision. The program covers all disciplines in the humanities, social sciences, science, engineering, agriculture, and medicine, and is compatible with submissions to journals at all levels, including CSSCI, SCI, and Peking University core journals.
Find your next favorite skill
Explore more curated AI skills for research, creation, and everyday work.
