AI style analyzer: a written read on tone, sentence construction and repetition in your draft. 12,000 characters, 5 free runs every 24 hours.
The task
You paste a draft. It reads the draft and writes back what it noticed: the register the writing sits in, how the sentences are put together, which shapes and words keep repeating, and where the rhythm goes flat. The output is prose, not a dashboard.
It runs on our AI server, which means your draft is transmitted. The allowance is 5 free runs per rolling 24 hours, 12,000 characters each, with no account required.
Expect this
Most tools in this category answer with numbers. This one answers with sentences. Here is the split, so nothing is a surprise after you spend a run.
The task
Give it a few hundred words rather than one sentence. Patterns need room to show.
Coverage
Ask about any of these and the report will normally have something to say.
The cause
Likely words are words that fit anywhere, and a model selecting likely words repeatedly converges on a narrow set of openers, connectives and paragraph shapes. Claim, elaboration, restatement, over and over.
Nothing in the output is wrong. That is the difficulty. There is no error to correct, only a sameness that a reader registers before they can name it.
It also compounds across a piece. One paragraph built on claim, elaboration and restatement reads as organised. Eight of them in a row reads as a template, and by the fourth the reader has stopped expecting a surprise. The analyzer is looking for exactly that: the point where variation stops.
Why it matters
Published under a brand name, uniform writing reads as generic, and generic gets skimmed. Three tells arrive first: every sentence at the same length, an opener that would fit any article, and connectives carrying weight an argument should be carrying.
The cost is not a detector verdict. It is a reader deciding within two paragraphs that the page was assembled rather than written, and leaving.
The fixes the report points at are usually small. Rewrite the first four words of each flagged paragraph. Cut one sentence per paragraph down to five words so the contrast does some work. Delete moreover, furthermore and additionally outright, and if the sentences stop following each other afterwards, the argument was the thing that needed attention rather than the joinery.
Straight answer
No. These are signals, not evidence. Formulaic human writing hits the same patterns constantly, and careful AI writing misses them.
The analyzer is instructed never to claim certainty about authorship, and we make no prediction about what a third-party detector would report. Treat the read as an editing prompt.
In practice
Editors opening a draft they did not write and needing a fast answer to why it reads thin. Content teams checking a new writer against the voice of the rest of the site.
Students reviewing their own work before submission, under their institution's own rules on AI tools. Anyone who has read a draft so often they can no longer hear it.
Paste the draft, run it, and read the report. It describes tone, construction, repetition and rhythm in sentences.
No. No readability index is computed here. The output is written analysis.
Yes. 5 free runs per rolling 24 hours, no account, no paid tier.
12,000 per run. Empty input is rejected before it reaches the model.
Yes. This is a server tool, so the text is transmitted to be analysed. Treat it accordingly.
No. Some competing style checkers run locally. This route does not.
No percentage. It can describe passive constructions it noticed, in words.
No. There is no parts-of-speech tagging and no frequency table.
No. That comparison is not performed and no author corpus exists here.
No. It reads and reports. The sentence and paragraph rewriters are separate routes.
No. Style patterns are signals rather than proof of authorship.
No. We do not test against detectors and will not guess their verdicts.
A few hundred words. One sentence rarely contains a visible pattern.
Only where your institution permits AI tools. Check the policy first.
No. Style is the job here, not correctness.
The tone analyzer answers how the writing sounds. This one covers construction and repetition as well.
Yes. It reads whatever you paste.
The interface shows when the next one unlocks, 24 hours after the run that used it.
No API and no batch mode. One sample per run.
Yes, identically in any modern mobile browser.
English is what it is built and checked for. Other languages may work, with no guarantee.