content-research-writer by skillcreatorai/ai-agent-skills
npx skills add https://github.com/skillcreatorai/ai-agent-skills --skill content-research-writer此技能作为您的写作伙伴,帮助您研究、构思大纲、起草和润色内容,同时保持您独特的文风和风格。
为您的文章创建一个专用文件夹:
mkdir ~/writing/my-article-title
cd ~/writing/my-article-title
创建您的草稿文件:
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
从大纲开始:
Help me create an outline for an article about [topic]
研究并添加引用:
Research [specific topic] and add citations to my outline
改进开头:
Here's my introduction. Help me make the hook more compelling.
获取章节反馈:
I just finished the "Why This Matters" section. Review it and give feedback.
润色和完善:
Review the full draft for flow, clarity, and consistency.
当用户请求写作协助时:
理解写作项目
询问澄清性问题:
协作大纲
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
- 本文涵盖内容
## 主体章节
### 章节 1:[标题]
- 要点 A
- 要点 B
- 示例/证据
- [需要研究:具体主题]
### 章节 2:[标题]
- 要点 C
- 要点 D
- 需要数据/引用
### 章节 3:[标题]
- 要点 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
## 研究待办事项
- [ ] 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:
进行研究
当用户请求研究某个主题时:
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
已添加到大纲的章节 2 下。
改进开头
当用户分享引言时,分析并加强:
当前开头分析:
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:
提供逐节反馈
当用户撰写每个章节时,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] → [建议的修改]
- [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
- [语气不一致] → [更好地匹配您的文风]
- [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]
准备好进入下一章节!
保持作者文风
重要原则:
定期询问:
引用管理
根据用户偏好处理参考文献:
文内引用:
Studies show 40% productivity improvement (McKinsey, 2024).
编号参考文献:
Studies show 40% productivity improvement [1].
[1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
脚注风格:
Studies show 40% productivity improvement^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.
...
最终审阅和润色
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**:[整体效果评估]
## 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、引用得当、以 Teresa 的文风撰写、结构清晰流畅的文章。
用户:"我正在撰写关于 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
### 近期数据
- Gartner:到 2025 年,80% 的 PM 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 PM 的判断力,而非取代它" - Marty Cagan
- [带引用的其他引述]
### 真实示例
1. **公司 A**:使用 AI 进行用户研究综合
- 结果:节省 60% 时间
- 来源:[引用]
2. **公司 B**:AI 驱动的路线图分析
- 结果:更好的利益相关者对齐
- 来源:[引用]
所有内容均已添加到您的大纲中,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。在本文中,我将讨论 AI 影响产品经理的一些方式。"
改进的选项:
选项 1(数据驱动):
"上个月,我让 AI 分析了 500 次客户访谈。它花了 30 分钟,而不是 3 周。产品管理将从此不同。"
选项 2(提问式):
"如果您能在早咖啡之前与每位客户交谈、阅读每条评论并分析每个支持工单,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以发现其中的模式。"
用户:"我刚写完'常见错误'这一节。有什么想法?"
回复:
# 反馈:常见错误章节
## 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,简洁的布局)
- 针对每个错误的实用建议
## 建议
### 使其更具体
您的第二点提到"糟糕的优先级排序",但可以更强有力:
当前:
> "许多团队因为关注功能而非结果而优先级排序糟糕。"
建议:
> "我见过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。他们优先考虑的是活动而非进展。"
### 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构建。
准备好进入下一节!
写作项目的推荐结构:
~/writing/article-name/
├── outline.md # 您的大纲
├── 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
每周安装数
136
仓库
GitHub 星标数
953
首次出现
Jan 20, 2026
安全审计
安装于
opencode119
gemini-cli116
codex110
cursor104
github-copilot101
claude-code93
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
136
Repository
GitHub Stars
953
First Seen
Jan 20, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykWarn
Installed on
opencode119
gemini-cli116
codex110
cursor104
github-copilot101
claude-code93
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
47,700 周安装
perf:bench 性能基准测试工具 - GitHub 仓库安装与使用指南
1 周安装
crash-quality-evaluator - 崩溃质量评估工具,提升软件稳定性和代码质量
1 周安装
appdump-monitor 应用监控工具 - GitHub API 集成,实时监控应用状态与性能
1 周安装
Apex Frontend 开发工具 - Apex Omnihub 前端技能包,提升开发效率
1 周安装
GitHub PR 结对代码审查技能 - 三回合协议驱动,提升代码审查质量与效率
1 周安装
PR影响范围分析工具:pr-blast-radius代码变更下游影响检测
1 周安装