content-research-writer by davepoon/buildwithclaude
npx skills add https://github.com/davepoon/buildwithclaude --skill content-research-writer此技能可作为你的写作伙伴,帮助你研究、构思大纲、起草和润色内容,同时保持你独特的写作风格。
为你的文章创建一个专用文件夹:
mkdir ~/writing/my-article-title
cd ~/writing/my-article-title
创建你的草稿文件:
touch article-draft.md
从此目录打开 Claude Code 并开始写作。
广告位招租
在这里展示您的产品或服务
触达数万 AI 开发者,精准高效
Help me create an outline for an article about [topic]
Research [specific topic] and add citations to my outline
Here's my introduction. Help me make the hook more compelling.
I just finished the "Why This Matters" section. Review it and give feedback.
Review the full draft for flow, clarity, and consistency.
当用户请求写作协助时:
询问澄清性问题:
* 主题和主要论点是什么?
* 目标受众是谁?
* 期望的长度/格式是什么?
* 你的目标是什么?(教育、说服、娱乐、解释)
* 是否有现有的研究或来源需要包含?
* 你的写作风格是什么?(正式、对话式、技术性)
2. 协作构思大纲
帮助构建内容结构:
# 文章大纲:[标题]
## 开头
- [开场白/故事/统计数据]
- [读者为何应该关心]
## 引言
- 背景和上下文
- 问题陈述
- 本文涵盖的内容
## 主体部分
### 第 1 节:[标题]
- 关键点 A
- 关键点 B
- 示例/证据
- [需要研究:具体主题]
### 第 2 节:[标题]
- 关键点 C
- 关键点 D
- 需要数据/引用
### 第 3 节:[标题]
- 关键点 E
- 反驳论点
- 解决方案
## 结论
- 主要观点总结
- 行动号召
- 最终思考
## 待办研究
- [ ] 查找关于 [主题] 的数据
- [ ] 获取 [概念] 的示例
- [ ] 为 [主张] 寻找引用来源
迭代大纲:
* 根据反馈进行调整
* 确保逻辑流畅
* 识别研究空白
* 标记需要深入探讨的部分
3. 进行研究
当用户请求研究某个主题时:
* 搜索相关信息
* 查找可靠来源
* 提取关键事实、引文和数据
* 以请求的格式添加引用
示例输出:
## 研究:AI 对生产力的影响
主要发现:
1. **生产力提升**:研究表明,内容创作任务可节省 40% 的时间 [1]
2. **采用率**:67% 的知识工作者每周使用 AI 工具 [2]
3. **专家引述**:"AI 增强而非取代人类创造力" - Dr. Jane Smith, MIT [3]
引用:
[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
已添加到大纲的第 2 节下。
当用户分享引言时,分析并强化:
当前开头分析:
* 优点:[积极元素]
* 可改进之处:[需要改进的方面]
* 情感影响:[当前 vs. 潜在]
建议的替代方案:
选项 1:[大胆的陈述]
[示例] 为何有效:[解释]
选项 2:[个人故事]
[示例] 为何有效:[解释]
选项 3:[令人惊讶的数据]
[示例] 为何有效:[解释]
评估开头的问题:
* 它是否激发了好奇心?
* 它是否承诺了价值?
* 它是否足够具体?
* 它是否与受众匹配?
5. 提供逐节反馈
当用户撰写每一节时,审阅以下方面:
# 反馈:[章节名称]
## 做得好的地方 ✓
- [优点 1]
- [优点 2]
- [优点 3]
## 改进建议
### 清晰度
- [具体问题] → [建议的修正]
- [复杂句子] → [更简单的替代方案]
### 流畅度
- [过渡问题] → [更好的连接]
- [段落顺序] → [建议的重新排序]
### 证据
- [需要支持的主张] → [添加引用或示例]
- [笼统的陈述] → [使其更具体]
### 风格
- [语调不一致] → [更好地匹配你的声音]
- [措辞选择] → [更强的替代方案]
## 具体的行级编辑
原文:
> [草稿中的确切引文]
建议:
> [改进版本]
原因:[解释]
## 需要考虑的问题
- [发人深省的问题 1]
- [发人深省的问题 2]
准备好进入下一节!
重要原则:
* **学习他们的风格**:阅读现有的写作样本
* **建议,而非取代**:提供选项,而非指令
* **匹配语调**:正式、随意、技术性、友好
* **尊重选择**:如果他们更喜欢自己的版本,请支持
* **增强,而非覆盖**:让他们的写作更好,而非不同
定期询问:
* "这听起来像你吗?"
* "这个语调合适吗?"
* "我应该更 [正式/随意/技术性] 还是更少一些?"
7. 引用管理
根据用户偏好处理参考文献:
行内引用:
研究表明生产力提高了 40% (McKinsey, 2024)。
编号参考文献:
研究表明生产力提高了 40% [1]。
[1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
脚注风格:
研究表明生产力提高了 40%^1
^1: McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
维护一个持续的引用列表:
## 参考文献
1. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
2. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
...
当草稿完成时,提供全面的反馈:
# 完整草稿审阅
## 总体评估
**优点**:
- [主要优点 1]
- [主要优点 2]
- [主要优点 3]
**影响力**:[整体有效性评估]
## 结构与流畅度
- [关于组织的评论]
- [过渡质量]
- [节奏评估]
## 内容质量
- [论点强度]
- [证据充分性]
- [示例有效性]
## 技术质量
- 语法和机制:[评估]
- 一致性:[评估]
- 引用:[完整性检查]
## 可读性
- 清晰度评分:[评估]
- 句子多样性:[评估]
- 段落长度:[评估]
## 最终润色建议
1. **引言**:[具体改进]
2. **主体**:[具体改进]
3. **结论**:[具体改进]
4. **标题**:[如有需要,提供选项]
## 发布前检查清单
- [ ] 所有主张都有来源
- [ ] 引用格式正确
- [ ] 示例清晰
- [ ] 过渡流畅
- [ ] 包含行动号召
- [ ] 校对拼写错误
准备发布!🚀
用户:"我正在写一篇关于持续发现的文章。帮我创建一个大纲。"
流程:
结果:一篇研究充分、引用正确、以 Teresa 的风格撰写、结构清晰流畅的文章。
用户:"我正在写关于 AI 对产品管理影响的文章。帮我找找当前的数据和例子。"
输出:
## 已整理的研究
### 最新数据
- Gartner:到 2025 年,80% 的产品经理将使用 AI 工具 [1]
- 调查:45% 的人报告功能发布速度更快 [2]
- 案例研究:Airbnb 的 AI 辅助优先级排序 [3]
### 专家引述
- "AI 放大产品经理的判断力,而非取代它" - Marty Cagan
- [带有引用的其他引述]
### 真实示例
1. **公司 A**:使用 AI 进行用户研究综合
- 结果:节省 60% 的时间
- 来源:[引用]
2. **公司 B**:AI 驱动的路线图分析
- 结果:更好的利益相关者协调
- 来源:[引用]
所有内容均已添加到你的大纲中,并附有正确的引用。
用户原始开头:
"产品管理正在因为 AI 而改变。在这篇文章中,我将讨论一些 AI 影响产品经理的方式。"
改进的选项:
选项 1(数据驱动):
"上个月,我让 AI 分析了 500 个客户访谈。它花了 30 分钟,而不是 3 周。产品管理将永远不同。"
选项 2(提问式):
"如果你能在早上喝咖啡之前,与每一位客户交谈,阅读每一条评论,并分析每一个支持工单,会怎样?"
选项 3(故事式):
"Sarah 花了两周时间构建了错误的功能。不是因为她不了解用户,而是因为她无法快速处理数百次访谈来发现其中的模式。"
用户:"刚写完我的'常见错误'部分。有什么想法?"
回复:
# 反馈:常见错误部分
## 做得好的地方 ✓
- 强有力的示例(Slack 通知的故事)
- 清晰的结构(3 个错误,布局简洁)
- 针对每个错误的实用建议
## 建议
### 使其更具体
你的第二点说"错误的优先级排序",但可以更强:
当前:
> "许多团队通过关注功能而非结果来错误地确定优先级。"
建议:
> "我曾目睹团队在一个季度内发布了 14 个功能,却没有推动任何关键指标。他们优先考虑了活动而非进展。"
### 添加数据
第三个错误将受益于证据:
> "[添加引用]:研究表明,没有定期用户接触的团队构建未使用功能的可能性高出 3 倍 [需要来源]"
### 流畅度改进
考虑重新排序:错误 3 → 错误 2 → 错误 1
这从小影响到大影响逐步构建。
准备好进入下一节!
写作项目的推荐结构:
~/writing/article-name/
├── outline.md # 你的大纲
├── research.md # 所有研究和引用
├── draft-v1.md # 第一稿
├── draft-v2.md # 修订稿
├── final.md # 可发布的最终稿
├── feedback.md # 收集的反馈
└── sources/ # 参考资料
├── study1.pdf
└── article2.md
每周安装量
105
代码仓库
GitHub 星标数
2.6K
首次出现
2026 年 1 月 22 日
安全审计
安装于
opencode97
cursor95
gemini-cli94
codex93
claude-code88
github-copilot86
This skill acts as your writing partner, helping you research, outline, draft, and refine content while maintaining your unique voice and style.
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.
Help me create an outline for an article about [topic]
Research [specific topic] and add citations to my outline
Here's my introduction. Help me make the hook more compelling.
I just finished the "Why This Matters" section. Review it and give feedback.
Review the full draft for flow, clarity, and consistency.
When a user requests writing assistance:
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:
# 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:
## 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:
# 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 :
Studies show 40% productivity improvement (McKinsey, 2024).
Numbered References :
Studies show 40% productivity improvement [1].
[1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
Footnote Style :
Studies show 40% productivity improvement^1
^1: McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
Maintain a running citations list:
## References
1. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
2. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
...
8. Final Review and Polish
When draft is complete, provide comprehensive feedback:
# 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! 🚀
User : "I'm writing an article about continuous discovery. Help me create an outline."
Process :
Result : Well-researched, properly cited article written in Teresa's voice with strong structure and flow.
User : "I'm writing about AI's impact on product management. Help me find current data and examples."
Output :
## 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.
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."
User : "Just finished my 'Common Mistakes' section. Thoughts?"
Response :
# 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!
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
Weekly Installs
105
Repository
GitHub Stars
2.6K
First Seen
Jan 22, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykWarn
Installed on
opencode97
cursor95
gemini-cli94
codex93
claude-code88
github-copilot86
AI 代码实施计划编写技能 | 自动化开发任务分解与 TDD 流程规划工具
50,900 周安装
Skill Creator 指南:如何为 Claude AI 创建高效技能模块 | 技能开发与优化
139 周安装
CSS伪元素最佳实践与视图过渡API检查工具 - 提升前端代码质量
139 周安装
Vercel React 最佳实践指南:65条性能优化规则,提升Next.js应用性能
141 周安装
NativeWind v4 Expo 配置指南:React Native Tailwind CSS 样式库集成教程
140 周安装
AI技能创建指南 - 如何为智能体开发高效、模块化的专业技能包
139 周安装
MCP CLI 使用指南:动态调用 MCP 服务器工具,无需永久集成
142 周安装