make-content-content-brief
Skill1.3k starsChanged 22 days agoMITView on GitHub
Writes a one-page content brief before any draft: audience, intent, the one arguable point, what top results already say and what this piece adds, an outline, a proof inventory with gaps marked, voice, CTA and banned words, checked against six gates. Use alone when you already have the topic, format, audience and destination and want only the brief; otherwise run make-content.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Trending
Quiet since March.thin dataabout the whole repository
Most recently taken up by
- gooseworks-ai/goose-skillsword for word, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Who's talking about athina-ai/goose-skills
The biggest 1 of 1 mention linking to the repository that our crawl found. Each line is their own headline.
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- gooseworks-ai/goose-skills★ 1.3k100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository180 other files it gives its agents.
- goose-adsSkill
- goose-product-photosSkill
- goose-video-localSkill
- goose-videoSkill
- gooseworksSkill
- make-custom-videoSkill
- ad-policy-checkSkill
- analyze-performance-call-and-learnSkill
- analyze-performance-diagnoseSkill
- analyze-performance-intakeSkill
- analyze-performance-rank-and-readSkill
- analyze-performance-revenue-joinSkill
- analyze-performanceSkill
- claims-gateSkill
- email-lifecycle-broadcast-plannerSkill
- email-lifecycle-flow-writerSkill
- email-lifecycle-lifecycle-auditSkill
- email-lifecycle-offer-mathSkill
- email-lifecycle-send-checkSkill
- email-lifecycleSkill
- honest-reviewSkill
- improve-search-visibility-citation-checkSkill
- improve-search-visibility-entity-footprintSkill
- improve-search-visibility-fix-writerSkill
- improve-search-visibility-page-and-foundation-checkSkill
- improve-search-visibility-question-setSkill
- improve-search-visibilitySkill
- improve-search-visibility-store-listing-auditSkill
- make-contentSkill
- make-content-source-to-unitsSkill
- make-content-two-pass-editSkill
- make-static-ads-ad-copySkill
- make-static-ads-claims-extractSkill
- make-static-ads-composeSkill
- make-static-ads-concept-gridSkill
- make-static-ads-copy-variantsSkill
- make-static-ads-find-referencesSkill
- make-static-ads-fix-rejectedSkill
- make-static-ads-graphic-requestSkill
- make-static-ads-render-reviewSkill
- make-static-adsSkill
- marketing-data-accessSkill
- marketing-guideSkill
- outcomes-ledgerSkill
- plan-campaign-brief-and-assetsSkill
- plan-campaign-budget-and-testsSkill
- plan-campaign-channel-decisionSkill
- plan-campaign-goal-chainSkill
- plan-campaignSkill
- research-audience-account-sourcingSkill
- research-audience-fit-definitionSkill
- research-audience-people-and-contactsSkill
- research-audience-score-segment-qaSkill
- research-audience-segment-passSkill
- research-audience-signals-and-hooksSkill
- research-audienceSkill
- research-competitors-category-passSkill
- research-competitors-edge-casesSkill
- research-competitors-rival-passSkill
- research-competitorsSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
No fresh draft starts without a brief.
- Distinctive: line 20
When the ask comes from a sibling:
- Very specific: line 24
When it is a comparison: gooseworks:competitor_read for dated competitor facts.
- Distinctive: line 56
POV: If needed and missing, run the interview before drafting, or switch to the no-POV format and say so.
- Distinctive: line 59
Audience fit: Check the piece against every audience in the kit.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Content brief
No fresh draft starts without a brief. Write it, check it against the six gates below, and save it before drafting.
Read first (all free)
gooseworks:brand_readsections: ["summary","kit","learnings"], lean (it returns everymust/dontfact; read learnings in full only fordo/insightrules): the voice, audience, value props, the kit's reference examples and templates, and the learnings (must/do/dont). Read the kit in full (alone:sections: ["kit"],detail: "full") only when you need its example lines or images.gooseworks:knowledge_searchwith the topic as the query, across all source types. This returns past creatives and feedback, saved rules, customer evidence and documents. Then work out which brand claims are usable through the shared claims gate (theclaims-gateskill,../claims-gate/SKILL.md): signed-off claims, the scoped sign-off this run, or plain product facts only. Proof slots may only hold usable claims and the sourced facts in../make-content/references/fact-rules.md.- The voice-of-customer bank (research-audience writes it):
gooseworks:file_readresearch/audience/voc-bank.md(brand coworker scope). If it is not there, usegooseworks:knowledge_searchsource_types: ["document","evidence"], query "voice-of-customer bank<topic>". It gives buyer phrases, objections and questions on this topic, each with its source and date. - When the ask comes from a sibling:
- improve-search-visibility page brief:
gooseworks:file_readsearch/briefs/<page-slug>.md. It gives the cluster, intent, the questions the page must answer, the facts it must state, the claims allowed and the competitor-name rules. Put the brief's path on the draft's first line. - plan-campaign asset list:
gooseworks:campaign_readcampaign_idgives the brief, the concepts and the asset row. - analyze-performance "what to make next": the latest
reports/performance/<date>.md(gooseworks:file_listreports/performance/), its "what to make next" section.
- improve-search-visibility page brief:
- When it is a comparison:
gooseworks:competitor_readfor dated competitor facts. - Top search results (search-intent pieces only, when no page brief already carries them): use the host's own web search when it has one (free). Otherwise make one
/v1/google/searchread through the proxy (themarketing-data-accessskill,../marketing-data-access/SKILL.md), under the spend gate (thespend-gateskill (../spend-gate/SKILL.md), proxy branch: a probe with the yes asked in SKILL.md's #5 message). Open the top 3 pieces and log URL and date; with no fetch, judge from titles and snippets and label it "snippets only". This feeds "information gain". - Public sources. When your host has web search or fetch, open 2–5 primary sources for the world facts the outline needs (platform help docs, standards bodies, original studies, official statistics). Log each URL and the date opened in the proof inventory. Never cite from memory. With no web tool, list them in "what unlocks this draft".
gooseworks:file_listcontent/in the brand workspace: existing briefs and drafts, to avoid duplicating a piece and to find internal-link candidates.
The brief (fill every line; use ../make-content/references/formats.md for the format's anatomy)
Brief — <working title> (+2 alternative titles)
Format · length · where it publishes · by when
Audience: <one role/segment>, their situation, what they already know
Intent: learn | do | decide | trust | be convinced | news
The one argument: <one sentence a reasonable person could disagree with>
Information gain: what the top results and competitor pieces in hand say (page brief, the search read above, research-competitors files) → what ours adds | "not checked: you declined the search read"
Outline (H2s written as claims): …
Proof inventory:
- <proof> — "Claims you may use" fact | product fact: <field> | VoC "<quote>" (<source>, <date>) | interview line | <public URL opened>
- [PROOF NEEDED: <what>, for H2 n]
Reader questions to answer word for word: …
POV needed: yes/no — have it: yes (source) / no → interview (`../make-content/references/point-of-view.md`)
Voice: brand | <person> (brand/voices/<handle>.md)
CTA: <action> → <destination the human gave>
House style: spelling (US/UK), heading case, reading level
Banned words: <from voice guide + learnings>
Sources this brief stands on: <list>
Live data: <what the page brief supplied> | none available (no search/AI-answer data tool today)Gates before drafting
- Thesis. The one argument is arguable. "Skincare matters" fails. "Most 'non-comedogenic' labels mean nothing, so check the ingredient list instead" passes.
- Proof. At least one real proof unit per H2, or an honest
[PROOF NEEDED]the human can see. Never a plausible stand-in. If fewer than half the H2s have real proof, the draft stops here (SKILL.md step 4, proof gate). Sections that only give instructions and make no factual claim need no proof. Interview lines from the human count as proof. - POV. If needed and missing, run the interview before drafting, or switch to the no-POV format and say so.
- Inputs. Missing format, audience, destination or deadline → ask once, all together. Never guess them.
- Length gate. For long-form (over ~1,200 words, guides, reports) and every case study, show the brief and outline and wait for the human's yes before drafting.
- Audience fit. Check the piece against every audience in the kit. A piece that insults one of them (e.g. "us vs hiring an agency" when agencies are a listed audience) is flagged to the human before drafting, with a reframe.
Save
gooseworks:file_write → content/briefs/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md in the brand workspace (scope: ../make-content/references/point-of-view.md, Workspace scope). The draft links back to it.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

