Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
开发需要联网clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

cell-content-strategy-diagnosis细胞内容策略诊断

Agent Skill

用于辅助文档、README、Markdown、说明文和内容稿件的整理与改写。它适合让 Agent 提炼结构、补齐章节、统一术语、检查链接或把零散材料整理成可读文档。使用时应保留项目已有事实、命令和路径,不要把未确认的信息写成确定结论;涉及对外文案时,还需要控制语气,避免过度营销或夸大能力。

总安装

3,966

周安装

162

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

1,283
OpenClaw

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT-0

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:cell-content-strategy-diagnosis(细胞内容策略诊断)
来源仓库:https://github.com/cellinlab/cell-content-strategy-diagnosis
安装命令:
openclaw skills install cell-content-strategy-diagnosis
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install cell-content-strategy-diagnosis

简介

中国创作者作品的内容策略诊断。当 Codex 需要判断主题、草稿或内容计划是否应该成为短视频、帖子等时使用

SKILL.md

name
content-strategy-diagnosis
description
Content-strategy diagnosis for Chinese creator work. Use when Codex needs to judge whether a topic, draft, or content plan should become a short video, post, article, or live session; identify whether the real problem is the angle, materials, format, platform fit, or goal linkage; and return a concrete next action instead of jumping straight into writing.
metadata
{"openclaw":{"homepage":"https://github.com/cellinlab/cell-skills/tree/main/skills/content-strategy-diagnosis"}}

Content Strategy Diagnosis

Overview

Use this skill before writing.

The goal is not to produce the content immediately, but to judge whether the content idea itself is standing on solid ground:

  • is the topic clear enough
  • does it have enough material density
  • what format can carry it best
  • which platform or scenario fits it
  • if the user wants growth, trust, consultation, or sales, does the content connect to that goal

This is a diagnosis skill, not a ghostwriting skill.

Quick Start

  1. First identify the input state: idea, plan, draft, or half-finished content.
  2. Clarify the user's goal before discussing tactics.
  3. Diagnose the main bottleneck before offering multiple suggestions.
  4. Recommend the best-fit format and platform, not every possible format.
  5. End with one concrete first move.

If the user only wants judgment, stop after the diagnosis and do not drift into full writing.

Default Contract

Assume the following unless the user says otherwise:

  • write in Chinese
  • diagnose before writing
  • prioritize the biggest problem, not every possible flaw
  • if the content has a commercial goal, check the offer or business linkage
  • if the content is not commercial, do not force a product-first conclusion
  • prefer one sharp next step over a long list of soft suggestions

Workflow

Phase 1: Scope the Task

Determine:

  • what the user already has: topic, outline, draft, or content plan
  • what the content is trying to do: growth, trust, education, conversion, testing, or thinking in public
  • whether the user already chose a format or platform
  • whether the current problem feels like a strategy problem or a writing problem

If the input is too thin to diagnose, say what is missing instead of pretending certainty.

For messy or mixed cases, read references/workflow.md.

Phase 2: Match the Right Carrier

Decide what form can best carry the idea:

  • short video for high-compression claims, conflict, strong hooks, and face-led persuasion
  • image post or carousel for saved information, steps, lists, and visual comparison
  • article or long-form post for layered logic, background, and deeper argument chains
  • live or dialogue format for interactive tension, objection handling, or case-based discussion

Do not recommend a format only because it is trendy. Recommend the format that fits the material and goal.

Phase 3: Run the Five-Lens Diagnosis

Judge the content through these five lenses:

  1. Topic and promise

- Is the central point clear? - Can the audience quickly tell what this piece is about and why it matters?

  1. Material density

- Does the content have enough data, scenes, examples, contrast, or sharp experience to carry the claim?

  1. Format and platform fit

- Is the chosen carrier helping or hurting the idea?

  1. Expression efficiency

- Is the piece saying one thing clearly, or packaging one small idea in too much explanation?

  1. Goal linkage

- If the user wants business results, can the content naturally connect to a service, product, consultation, or next action?

Read references/diagnostic-lens.md when the diagnosis is not obvious.

Phase 4: Separate the Real Problem from the Visible Symptom

Common mismatches:

  • the user thinks the issue is the title, but the real issue is weak material
  • the user thinks the issue is the platform, but the real issue is choosing the wrong content form
  • the user thinks the issue is "AI flavor", but the real issue is low specificity
  • the user thinks the issue is writing quality, but the real issue is an unclear promise

Name the primary problem directly.

Phase 5: Recommend the Next Skill or Next Move

After diagnosing, choose the smallest next step that moves the work forward:

  • if the angle and format are right but the full piece is not written, hand off to $deep-writer
  • if the piece needs a stronger short-form opening, hand off to $hook-optimizer
  • if the structure is fine but the voice is too flat or too templated, hand off to $celf-style-writer
  • if the user needs to study comparable creators or businesses first, hand off to $benchmark-filter

Do not hand off by default. Only recommend the next skill if it clearly solves the diagnosed bottleneck.

Output Format

Default to assets/diagnosis-template.md.

At minimum, include:

  • one-line diagnosis
  • recommended format and platform
  • five-lens table or bullet-equivalent
  • the main bottleneck
  • one concrete first action
  • the best next skill if applicable

Hard Rules

Do not:

  • write the full content when the user asked for diagnosis
  • pretend all formats are equally fine
  • use "can go viral" as the main judgment standard
  • force a sales logic onto every piece of content
  • blame the platform before checking the content itself
  • give a long generic list of tips instead of naming the main issue

Always:

  • clarify the content goal
  • recommend a primary format
  • distinguish strategy problems from writing problems
  • state material gaps when they matter
  • end with one clear next move

Resource Map

- Read for the full diagnosis sequence, mixed-input handling, and symptom-versus-cause rules.

- Read for the five lenses, scoring heuristics, and common failure patterns.

- Use for the standard report shape.

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

OpenClaw

86.88%
按下载量换算1,115

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills