Video Ideation Engine

Generate positioned YouTube video ideas grounded in existing research and competitive analysis. Outputs structured idea briefs ready to feed into /hooks and /outlines.

This skill is strategy, not research. It consumes research outputs from /yt-pipeline, /firecrawl-search, or vault notes. It does NOT replicate deep research — if no research exists yet, it runs a lightweight competitive scan only.

When This Skill Activates

Activate when the user wants to:

• Brainstorm video ideas on a topic
• Figure out what video to make next
• Find angles on a trending topic
• Generate content ideas from research they've already done

Example triggers:

• "Give me video ideas about RAG"
• "What should I make a video about this week?"
• "Brainstorm some Claude Code video angles"
• /ideation or /ideation <topic>

Workflow

Step 1 — Gather Existing Context

Check what research already exists before doing anything:

1. Search the vault — look in research/ and projects/ for files related to the topic
2. Check for recent yt-pipeline or firecrawl-search outputs — these are your primary source material
3. If the user references specific notes, read them

If research exists: Use it as the foundation. Do NOT re-research the topic.

If no research exists: Do a lightweight competitive scan only (Step 2). Suggest the user run /yt-pipeline <topic> or /firecrawl-search <topic> first if they want deeper analysis.

Step 2 — Lightweight Competitive Scan

Quick YouTube search to see what exists — this is positioning intel, not deep research:

Optional step. This uses a separate yt-search helper script that does not ship with this plugin. If it isn't installed, skip the scan and generate ideas from the user's described topic and any vault/research context instead — the rest of the skill works fine without it.

python "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/yt-search/scripts/search.py" <topic keywords> --count 15 --months 3

From results, extract:

• Saturated angles — what's been covered to death?
• Open gaps — what has NO or weak coverage?
• Performance outliers — high views-to-subs ratio signals a hot angle
• Key creators — who's covering this, how big are they?

Present the landscape in 3-5 bullets. Don't dump raw search results.

Step 3 — Generate Idea Angles

Produce 7-10 video ideas with full positioning for each:

Title (working): A rough title — not final, just enough to capture the angle.

Angle: What makes this different from what exists? One sentence.

Core Desire: Map to one of the Four Horsemen:

• Money — will this help the viewer make or save money?
• Time — will this save them time or eliminate wasted effort?
• Health — does this reduce stress, burnout, or cognitive load?
• Status — does this make them look smart, capable, or ahead of the curve?

Proxy Desire (One Standard Deviation): Don't target the core desire directly — that triggers the BS detector. Package it one step away.

• Core: "Make more money" → Proxy: "Automate your entire content pipeline"
• Core: "Save time" → Proxy: "Never start a Claude Code session from scratch again"
• Core: "Status" → Proxy: "Build what your team thinks requires a dev shop"

Shock Score (1-100): How surprising is this to your audience? Rate by the Law of Interestingness — distance between what the viewer believes and what this video reveals. Target 70+.

Format: What video structure fits?

• Concept/Educational ("7 RAG Concepts...")
• Level-Based ("6 Levels of...")
• Tool Demo ("I Built X with Y")
• Contrarian Take ("X Is Ruining Your Y")
• Case Study ("How I Did X")
• Listicle ("5 Tools That...")
• Tutorial ("How to Set Up X")
• Head-to-Head ("X vs Y")

Competitive gap: What specific gap does this fill? Reference the landscape from Step 2.

Step 4 — Rank and Recommend

Sort into three tiers:

Tier 1 — High Confidence (2-3 ideas) Clear competitive gaps, high shock scores, proven formats. "Film tomorrow" options.

Tier 2 — Strong With Conditions (2-3 ideas) Good angles that need research, a demo build, or timing. Worth planning for.

Tier 3 — Experimental (2-3 ideas) Higher risk, higher ceiling. New formats, contrarian takes, untested angles.

Step 5 — Output Structured Briefs

For each Tier 1 idea, output:

## [Working Title]

- **Angle:** [One sentence positioning]
- **Core Desire:** [Money / Time / Health / Status]
- **Proxy Desire:** [One standard deviation away]
- **Shock Score:** [X/100]
- **Format:** [Video structure type]
- **Competitive Gap:** [What's missing from existing coverage]
- **Why Now:** [Timeliness signal — trending, just launched, community buzz]
- **Research Depth:** [Sufficient / Thin — see Step 5b]
- **Related vault notes:** [[wikilink]] [[wikilink]]

Step 5b — Deepen Research via NotebookLM (If Needed)

When the user selects a Tier 1 idea, check whether the existing research actually covers that specific angle well enough to build a video.

Signs research is sufficient:

• The vault research notes directly address the chosen angle's key claims
• There are specific stats, sources, or examples that support the talking points
• You could write an outline right now without guessing

Signs research is thin:

• The angle is a subset or twist on the broader topic that wasn't explored in depth
• Key claims in the idea brief don't have supporting data yet
• You'd need to speculate or hand-wave in an outline

If research is thin and a NotebookLM notebook already exists (from a prior /yt-pipeline run):

1. Find the notebook — check recent vault research files for a NotebookLM notebook ID, or list notebooks:

   notebooklm list --json

2. Set the notebook context:

   notebooklm use <notebook_id>

3. Run 2-3 targeted follow-up questions against the existing sources:

   notebooklm ask "What specific data or examples support [the chosen angle]?" --new
   notebooklm ask "What counterarguments or limitations exist for [the chosen angle]?"
   notebooklm ask "What's the most surprising or non-obvious insight about [the chosen angle]?"

4. Use the answers to refine the idea brief — update the shock score, fill in missing competitive gaps, and add specific talking points.

If no notebook exists, suggest the user run /yt-pipeline <topic> first, or proceed with lighter research via /firecrawl-search.

If research is sufficient, skip this step and move to /hooks or /outlines.

Step 6 — Save to Vault (Optional)

If the user wants to save: YOUR_VAULT_PATH/projects/YYYY-MM-DD-ideation-<topic>.md

Key Principles

• This is strategy, not research. Don't replicate what /yt-pipeline or /firecrawl-search already do. Consume their outputs.
• Differentiation is everything. An idea without a competitive gap is a wasted video. Always explain WHY this angle is different.
• Desire mapping is not optional. Every idea maps to a Horseman + proxy desire. No map = too abstract.
• Don't pitch ideas you have already done. Check projects/ and projects/archive/ before suggesting.
• Be opinionated. "Film this one first because..." is more useful than a flat list.