Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

content-research-writer内容研究作家

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

353

周安装

15

GitHub Stars

46

下载量

124
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

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

unknown

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:content-research-writer(内容研究作家)
来源仓库:https://github.com/commandcodeai/agent-skills
仓库路径:skills/content-research-writer
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/commandcodeai/agent-skills --skill content-research-writer
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 npx skills 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。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/commandcodeai/agent-skills --skill content-research-writer

简介

协助撰写博客、教程和技术文档,保持作者风格的同时提升逻辑与可读性。

  • 支持大纲构建、章节扩展、术语统一和引用核查,适合长文协作。
  • 可分段反馈写作建议,帮助优化开头钩子与整体结构。
  • 应保留原始事实信息,避免虚构结论;对外文案需控制语气与营销倾向。
  • content-research-writer 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

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]
  1. Research and add citations:
Research [specific topic] and add citations to my outline
  1. Improve the hook:
Here's my introduction. Help me make the hook more compelling.
  1. Get section feedback:
I just finished the "Why This Matters" section. Review it and give feedback.
  1. 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)

  1. 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

  1. Conduct Research When user requests research on a topic: 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.

- Search for relevant information - Find credible sources - Extract key facts, quotes, and data - Add citations in requested format

  1. Improve Hooks When user shares an introduction, analyze and strengthen: Current Hook Analysis: 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:

- What works: [positive elements] - What could be stronger: [areas for improvement] - Emotional impact: [current vs. potential] - Does it create curiosity? - Does it promise value? - Is it specific enough? - Does it match the audience?

  1. 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!
  2. Preserve Writer's Voice Important principles: Ask periodically:

- 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 - "Does this sound like you?" - "Is this the right tone?" - "Should I be more/less [formal/casual/technical]?"

  1. 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....
  2. 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! 🚀

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:

## 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:

# 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

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

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

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

Codex

36.38%
按下载量换算45

Claude

31.2%
按下载量换算39

Cursor

17.02%
按下载量换算21

Gemini CLI

9.32%
按下载量换算12

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。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