# Assistant closing offer Part of [The AI Tells Index](https://feedsquad.com/ai-tells). A tell signals low effort. It does not identify an author. Skilled writers produce every shape listed here, some of them daily, and automated detectors misread those writers for it at rates measured above 60 percent on non-native English prose. Nothing in this index proves that a machine wrote anything. Read an entry as one piece of evidence to weigh against the false-positive notes printed beside it. ## Facts - Id: assistant-closing-offer - Category: Model register (model-register) - Subcategory: assistant-leak - Also known as: Would you like me to, Is there anything else, Let me know if you need - Status: Active. Currently signals low-effort writing. - Severity: high - Evidence grade: corroborated (named independently by multiple credible secondary sources) - Languages: en - Added: 2026-08-15 - Updated: 2026-08-17 - Page: https://feedsquad.com/ai-tells/assistant-closing-offer ## Description The last line offers to keep working. It asks whether the reader wants a section expanded, or whether anything else needs covering. The offer is addressed to whoever ran the prompt. It survives into a post where nobody can take it up. ## Why it reads as machine-written This is the closing half of the same conversational wrapper that the opening half leaves at the top. Wikipedia catalogues the strings in its guide to signs of AI-generated comments, where most sightings are on talk pages and in edit summaries. The vale-ai-tells rule set carries more than sixty variants of the closing pleasantry in a single rule, which is a fair measure of how mechanical the habit has become. An offer that cannot be accepted is the giveaway. ## Detection Type: deterministic (a regular expression, run as written) Scope: sentence ECMAScript regular expression. The build validator compiles it and tests it against this entry's own specimens. ```regex \bwould you like me to\s+\w+|\bis there anything else\s+(?:I\s+can|that\s+I|you(?:'|’)?d\s+like)|\blet me know if you(?:'|’)?d like me to\s+\w+ ``` Flags: i ## Examples Constructed specimens. Written for this index. Never quoted from anyone's posts. ### Specimen 1 Before, exhibiting the tell: > That is the whole weekly review process, and it works well for most teams. Would you like me to expand any section into its own post? After, repaired: > That is the entire weekly review process. Ours runs 11 minutes and covers two numbers, pipeline added and cash left. Anything that needs a third number goes to the Thursday call instead. Note: The offer goes and the paragraph ends on the two things the review actually tracks. Figures in this repair are invented for the specimen. ### Specimen 2 Before, exhibiting the tell: > The migration is on track and the team is comfortable with where things stand. Is there anything else I can clarify about the timeline? After, repaired: > The migration finishes on 14 September. The read-only window is the last four hours of 13 September, and invoices raised in that window queue and post the next morning. Note: The repair answers the question the offer was fishing for. ## False positives Who legitimately writes this way. Correspondence ends this way for good reason. Support agents, account managers and teachers write the closing offer because they will act on it, and in an email the sentence is doing real work. Business-English courses teach the exact formulas, so writers taught English through correspondence carry them everywhere. Several workplaces treat the closing offer as basic courtesy and read its absence as curt. Scope the rule to published artifacts: a post, a listing, an article, a product page. In a message to a named person the offer is a promise, and a promise is not a tell. ## Model attribution No family owns it. The offer is trained conversational behaviour shared across assistant products, and the wording sits close enough between vendors that no product can be named from it. ## Platform notes - wikipedia: The comments guide is where these strings are catalogued, and it records them mostly on talk pages and in edit summaries. Articles carry them less often. That is the surface where a reply and a published artifact are hardest to tell apart. - linkedin: The comment field is the risk surface here, because a comment looks like correspondence and publishes like an artifact. LinkedIn enforcement in this area targets automated posting, not writing style. ## Sources 1. Wikipedia: Signs of AI-generated comments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI-generated_comments (tier: community; accessed 2026-08-14) 2. vale-ai-tells, 111 machine-checkable rules https://github.com/tbhb/vale-ai-tells (tier: community; accessed 2026-08-14) ## Status history Ids are permanent. A retired tell keeps its id and its page. - 2026-08-15, Active: Active on two community sources that were compiled separately: the Wikipedia guide to signs of AI-generated comments lists the strings, and vale-ai-tells ships them as a machine-checkable rule. Pattern verified on 2026-08-15 against both specimens and against three ordinary sentences, including a support reply that ends by inviting a question about an invoice. ## License CC BY 4.0. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Attribution: The AI Tells Index, feedsquad.com/ai-tells Reuse the data, including commercially. Keep the attribution line. --- Dataset version 1.0.0. Schema version 1. Part of [FeedSquad](https://feedsquad.com). Built by [Herman Foundry](https://hermanfoundry.com) from Levi, Finnish Lapland.