539 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
539 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: content-research-writer
|
|
description: Assists in writing high-quality content by conducting research, adding citations, improving hooks, iterating on outlines, and providing real-time feedback on each section. Transforms your writing process from solo effort to collaborative partnership.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Content Research Writer
|
|
|
|
This skill acts as your writing partner, helping you research, outline, draft, and refine content while maintaining your unique voice and style.
|
|
|
|
## When to Use This Skill
|
|
|
|
- Writing blog posts, articles, or newsletters
|
|
- Creating educational content or tutorials
|
|
- Drafting thought leadership pieces
|
|
- Researching and writing case studies
|
|
- Producing technical documentation with sources
|
|
- Writing with proper citations and references
|
|
- Improving hooks and introductions
|
|
- Getting section-by-section feedback while writing
|
|
|
|
## What This Skill Does
|
|
|
|
1. **Collaborative Outlining**: Helps you structure ideas into coherent outlines
|
|
2. **Research Assistance**: Finds relevant information and adds citations
|
|
3. **Hook Improvement**: Strengthens your opening to capture attention
|
|
4. **Section Feedback**: Reviews each section as you write
|
|
5. **Voice Preservation**: Maintains your writing style and tone
|
|
6. **Citation Management**: Adds and formats references properly
|
|
7. **Iterative Refinement**: Helps you improve through multiple drafts
|
|
|
|
## How to Use
|
|
|
|
### Setup Your Writing Environment
|
|
|
|
Create a dedicated folder for your article:
|
|
```
|
|
mkdir ~/writing/my-article-title
|
|
cd ~/writing/my-article-title
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Create your draft file:
|
|
```
|
|
touch article-draft.md
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Open Claude Code from this directory and start writing.
|
|
|
|
### Basic Workflow
|
|
|
|
1. **Start with an outline**:
|
|
```
|
|
Help me create an outline for an article about [topic]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
2. **Research and add citations**:
|
|
```
|
|
Research [specific topic] and add citations to my outline
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
3. **Improve the hook**:
|
|
```
|
|
Here's my introduction. Help me make the hook more compelling.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
4. **Get section feedback**:
|
|
```
|
|
I just finished the "Why This Matters" section. Review it and give feedback.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
5. **Refine and polish**:
|
|
```
|
|
Review the full draft for flow, clarity, and consistency.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Instructions
|
|
|
|
When a user requests writing assistance:
|
|
|
|
1. **Understand the Writing Project**
|
|
|
|
Ask clarifying questions:
|
|
- What's the topic and main argument?
|
|
- Who's the target audience?
|
|
- What's the desired length/format?
|
|
- What's your goal? (educate, persuade, entertain, explain)
|
|
- Any existing research or sources to include?
|
|
- What's your writing style? (formal, conversational, technical)
|
|
|
|
2. **Collaborative Outlining**
|
|
|
|
Help structure the content:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Article Outline: [Title]
|
|
|
|
## Hook
|
|
- [Opening line/story/statistic]
|
|
- [Why reader should care]
|
|
|
|
## Introduction
|
|
- Context and background
|
|
- Problem statement
|
|
- What this article covers
|
|
|
|
## Main Sections
|
|
|
|
### Section 1: [Title]
|
|
- Key point A
|
|
- Key point B
|
|
- Example/evidence
|
|
- [Research needed: specific topic]
|
|
|
|
### Section 2: [Title]
|
|
- Key point C
|
|
- Key point D
|
|
- Data/citation needed
|
|
|
|
### Section 3: [Title]
|
|
- Key point E
|
|
- Counter-arguments
|
|
- Resolution
|
|
|
|
## Conclusion
|
|
- Summary of main points
|
|
- Call to action
|
|
- Final thought
|
|
|
|
## Research To-Do
|
|
- [ ] Find data on [topic]
|
|
- [ ] Get examples of [concept]
|
|
- [ ] Source citation for [claim]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Iterate on outline**:
|
|
- Adjust based on feedback
|
|
- Ensure logical flow
|
|
- Identify research gaps
|
|
- Mark sections for deep dives
|
|
|
|
3. **Conduct Research**
|
|
|
|
When user requests research on a topic:
|
|
|
|
- Search for relevant information
|
|
- Find credible sources
|
|
- Extract key facts, quotes, and data
|
|
- Add citations in requested format
|
|
|
|
Example output:
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Research: AI Impact on Productivity
|
|
|
|
Key Findings:
|
|
|
|
1. **Productivity Gains**: Studies show 40% time savings for
|
|
content creation tasks [1]
|
|
|
|
2. **Adoption Rates**: 67% of knowledge workers use AI tools
|
|
weekly [2]
|
|
|
|
3. **Expert Quote**: "AI augments rather than replaces human
|
|
creativity" - Dr. Jane Smith, MIT [3]
|
|
|
|
Citations:
|
|
[1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024). "The Economic Potential
|
|
of Generative AI"
|
|
[2] Stack Overflow Developer Survey (2024)
|
|
[3] Smith, J. (2024). MIT Technology Review interview
|
|
|
|
Added to outline under Section 2.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
4. **Improve Hooks**
|
|
|
|
When user shares an introduction, analyze and strengthen:
|
|
|
|
**Current Hook Analysis**:
|
|
- What works: [positive elements]
|
|
- What could be stronger: [areas for improvement]
|
|
- Emotional impact: [current vs. potential]
|
|
|
|
**Suggested Alternatives**:
|
|
|
|
Option 1: [Bold statement]
|
|
> [Example]
|
|
*Why it works: [explanation]*
|
|
|
|
Option 2: [Personal story]
|
|
> [Example]
|
|
*Why it works: [explanation]*
|
|
|
|
Option 3: [Surprising data]
|
|
> [Example]
|
|
*Why it works: [explanation]*
|
|
|
|
**Questions to hook**:
|
|
- Does it create curiosity?
|
|
- Does it promise value?
|
|
- Is it specific enough?
|
|
- Does it match the audience?
|
|
|
|
5. **Provide Section-by-Section Feedback**
|
|
|
|
As user writes each section, review for:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Feedback: [Section Name]
|
|
|
|
## What Works Well ✓
|
|
- [Strength 1]
|
|
- [Strength 2]
|
|
- [Strength 3]
|
|
|
|
## Suggestions for Improvement
|
|
|
|
### Clarity
|
|
- [Specific issue] → [Suggested fix]
|
|
- [Complex sentence] → [Simpler alternative]
|
|
|
|
### Flow
|
|
- [Transition issue] → [Better connection]
|
|
- [Paragraph order] → [Suggested reordering]
|
|
|
|
### Evidence
|
|
- [Claim needing support] → [Add citation or example]
|
|
- [Generic statement] → [Make more specific]
|
|
|
|
### Style
|
|
- [Tone inconsistency] → [Match your voice better]
|
|
- [Word choice] → [Stronger alternative]
|
|
|
|
## Specific Line Edits
|
|
|
|
Original:
|
|
> [Exact quote from draft]
|
|
|
|
Suggested:
|
|
> [Improved version]
|
|
|
|
Why: [Explanation]
|
|
|
|
## Questions to Consider
|
|
- [Thought-provoking question 1]
|
|
- [Thought-provoking question 2]
|
|
|
|
Ready to move to next section!
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
6. **Preserve Writer's Voice**
|
|
|
|
Important principles:
|
|
|
|
- **Learn their style**: Read existing writing samples
|
|
- **Suggest, don't replace**: Offer options, not directives
|
|
- **Match tone**: Formal, casual, technical, friendly
|
|
- **Respect choices**: If they prefer their version, support it
|
|
- **Enhance, don't override**: Make their writing better, not different
|
|
|
|
Ask periodically:
|
|
- "Does this sound like you?"
|
|
- "Is this the right tone?"
|
|
- "Should I be more/less [formal/casual/technical]?"
|
|
|
|
7. **Citation Management**
|
|
|
|
Handle references based on user preference:
|
|
|
|
**Inline Citations**:
|
|
```markdown
|
|
Studies show 40% productivity improvement (McKinsey, 2024).
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Numbered References**:
|
|
```markdown
|
|
Studies show 40% productivity improvement [1].
|
|
|
|
[1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Footnote Style**:
|
|
```markdown
|
|
Studies show 40% productivity improvement^1
|
|
|
|
^1: McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Maintain a running citations list:
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## References
|
|
|
|
1. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
|
|
2. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
|
|
...
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
8. **Final Review and Polish**
|
|
|
|
When draft is complete, provide comprehensive feedback:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Full Draft Review
|
|
|
|
## Overall Assessment
|
|
|
|
**Strengths**:
|
|
- [Major strength 1]
|
|
- [Major strength 2]
|
|
- [Major strength 3]
|
|
|
|
**Impact**: [Overall effectiveness assessment]
|
|
|
|
## Structure & Flow
|
|
- [Comments on organization]
|
|
- [Transition quality]
|
|
- [Pacing assessment]
|
|
|
|
## Content Quality
|
|
- [Argument strength]
|
|
- [Evidence sufficiency]
|
|
- [Example effectiveness]
|
|
|
|
## Technical Quality
|
|
- Grammar and mechanics: [assessment]
|
|
- Consistency: [assessment]
|
|
- Citations: [completeness check]
|
|
|
|
## Readability
|
|
- Clarity score: [evaluation]
|
|
- Sentence variety: [evaluation]
|
|
- Paragraph length: [evaluation]
|
|
|
|
## Final Polish Suggestions
|
|
|
|
1. **Introduction**: [Specific improvements]
|
|
2. **Body**: [Specific improvements]
|
|
3. **Conclusion**: [Specific improvements]
|
|
4. **Title**: [Options if needed]
|
|
|
|
## Pre-Publish Checklist
|
|
- [ ] All claims sourced
|
|
- [ ] Citations formatted
|
|
- [ ] Examples clear
|
|
- [ ] Transitions smooth
|
|
- [ ] Call to action present
|
|
- [ ] Proofread for typos
|
|
|
|
Ready to publish! 🚀
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Examples
|
|
|
|
### Example 1: Teresa Torres's Workflow
|
|
|
|
**User**: "I'm writing an article about continuous discovery. Help me create an outline."
|
|
|
|
**Process**:
|
|
1. Collaborates on outline structure
|
|
2. Identifies research needs
|
|
3. User starts writing introduction
|
|
4. Reviews and improves the hook
|
|
5. User writes each section
|
|
6. Provides feedback after each section
|
|
7. Conducts research and adds citations
|
|
8. Final review of complete draft
|
|
9. Polish and prep for publishing
|
|
|
|
**Result**: Well-researched, properly cited article written in Teresa's voice with strong structure and flow.
|
|
|
|
### Example 2: Research-Heavy Article
|
|
|
|
**User**: "I'm writing about AI's impact on product management. Help me find current data and examples."
|
|
|
|
**Output**:
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Research Compiled
|
|
|
|
### Recent Data
|
|
- Gartner: 80% of PMs will use AI tools by 2025 [1]
|
|
- Survey: 45% report faster feature shipping [2]
|
|
- Case study: Airbnb's AI-assisted prioritization [3]
|
|
|
|
### Expert Quotes
|
|
- "AI amplifies PM judgment, not replaces it" - Marty Cagan
|
|
- [Additional quotes with citations]
|
|
|
|
### Real Examples
|
|
1. **Company A**: Used AI for user research synthesis
|
|
- Result: 60% time savings
|
|
- Source: [citation]
|
|
|
|
2. **Company B**: AI-powered roadmap analysis
|
|
- Result: Better stakeholder alignment
|
|
- Source: [citation]
|
|
|
|
All added to your outline with proper citations.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Example 3: Hook Improvement
|
|
|
|
**User's Original Hook**:
|
|
> "Product management is changing because of AI. In this article, I'll discuss some ways AI affects product managers."
|
|
|
|
**Improved Options**:
|
|
|
|
**Option 1 (Data-driven)**:
|
|
> "Last month, I asked AI to analyze 500 customer interviews. It took 30 minutes instead of 3 weeks. Product management will never be the same."
|
|
|
|
**Option 2 (Question)**:
|
|
> "What if you could talk to every customer, read every review, and analyze every support ticket—all before your morning coffee?"
|
|
|
|
**Option 3 (Story)**:
|
|
> "Sarah spent two weeks building the wrong feature. Not because she didn't understand her users, but because she couldn't process the hundreds of interviews fast enough to spot the pattern."
|
|
|
|
### Example 4: Section Feedback
|
|
|
|
**User**: "Just finished my 'Common Mistakes' section. Thoughts?"
|
|
|
|
**Response**:
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Feedback: Common Mistakes Section
|
|
|
|
## What Works Well ✓
|
|
- Strong examples (the Slack notification story)
|
|
- Clear structure (3 mistakes, clean layout)
|
|
- Practical advice for each mistake
|
|
|
|
## Suggestions
|
|
|
|
### Make It More Specific
|
|
Your second point says "Bad prioritization" but could be stronger:
|
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
> "Many teams prioritize badly by focusing on features instead of outcomes."
|
|
|
|
Suggested:
|
|
> "I've watched teams ship 14 features in a quarter yet move none of their key metrics. They prioritized activity over progress."
|
|
|
|
### Add Data
|
|
The third mistake would benefit from evidence:
|
|
> "[Add citation]: Studies show teams without regular user contact are 3x more likely to build unused features [needs source]"
|
|
|
|
### Flow Improvement
|
|
Consider reordering: Mistake 3 → Mistake 2 → Mistake 1
|
|
This builds from small to big impact.
|
|
|
|
Ready for the next section!
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Writing Workflows
|
|
|
|
### Blog Post Workflow
|
|
1. Outline together
|
|
2. Research key points
|
|
3. Write introduction → get feedback
|
|
4. Write body sections → feedback each
|
|
5. Write conclusion → final review
|
|
6. Polish and edit
|
|
|
|
### Newsletter Workflow
|
|
1. Discuss hook ideas
|
|
2. Quick outline (shorter format)
|
|
3. Draft in one session
|
|
4. Review for clarity and links
|
|
5. Quick polish
|
|
|
|
### Technical Tutorial Workflow
|
|
1. Outline steps
|
|
2. Write code examples
|
|
3. Add explanations
|
|
4. Test instructions
|
|
5. Add troubleshooting section
|
|
6. Final review for accuracy
|
|
|
|
### Thought Leadership Workflow
|
|
1. Brainstorm unique angle
|
|
2. Research existing perspectives
|
|
3. Develop your thesis
|
|
4. Write with strong POV
|
|
5. Add supporting evidence
|
|
6. Craft compelling conclusion
|
|
|
|
## Pro Tips
|
|
|
|
1. **Work in VS Code**: Better than web Claude for long-form writing
|
|
2. **One section at a time**: Get feedback incrementally
|
|
3. **Save research separately**: Keep a research.md file
|
|
4. **Version your drafts**: article-v1.md, article-v2.md, etc.
|
|
5. **Read aloud**: Use feedback to identify clunky sentences
|
|
6. **Set deadlines**: "I want to finish the draft today"
|
|
7. **Take breaks**: Write, get feedback, pause, revise
|
|
|
|
## File Organization
|
|
|
|
Recommended structure for writing projects:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
~/writing/article-name/
|
|
├── outline.md # Your outline
|
|
├── research.md # All research and citations
|
|
├── draft-v1.md # First draft
|
|
├── draft-v2.md # Revised draft
|
|
├── final.md # Publication-ready
|
|
├── feedback.md # Collected feedback
|
|
└── sources/ # Reference materials
|
|
├── study1.pdf
|
|
└── article2.md
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Best Practices
|
|
|
|
### For Research
|
|
- Verify sources before citing
|
|
- Use recent data when possible
|
|
- Balance different perspectives
|
|
- Link to original sources
|
|
|
|
### For Feedback
|
|
- Be specific about what you want: "Is this too technical?"
|
|
- Share your concerns: "I'm worried this section drags"
|
|
- Ask questions: "Does this flow logically?"
|
|
- Request alternatives: "What's another way to explain this?"
|
|
|
|
### For Voice
|
|
- Share examples of your writing
|
|
- Specify tone preferences
|
|
- Point out good matches: "That sounds like me!"
|
|
- Flag mismatches: "Too formal for my style"
|
|
|
|
## Related Use Cases
|
|
|
|
- Creating social media posts from articles
|
|
- Adapting content for different audiences
|
|
- Writing email newsletters
|
|
- Drafting technical documentation
|
|
- Creating presentation content
|
|
- Writing case studies
|
|
- Developing course outlines
|
|
|