deep-writer
Skill29 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Adaptive deep-writing workflow for all forms of deep content creation in Chinese, including turning transcripts and note piles into articles, deepening rough drafts, or writing structured long-form content from a topic, thesis, question, or outline. Use when Codex needs to clarify audience and purpose, build a brief, extract or construct a sound argument structure, merge repeated ideas, design an outline before drafting, deepen analysis, preserve source logic when needed, or deliver writing through staged checkpoints instead of a one-shot article.
In this repository26 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-writing-diagnosisSkill
- benchmark-filterSkill
- book-material-minerSkill
- cc-designSkill
- celf-style-writerSkill
- content-strategy-diagnosisSkill
- hook-optimizerSkill
- horizontal-vertical-analysisSkill
- learning-builderSkill
- mrbeast-perspectiveSkill
- naval-perspectiveSkill
- opc-case-researchSkill
- paul-graham-perspectiveSkill
- perspective-distillerSkill
- short-video-script-builderSkill
- speech-structure-coachSkill
- spoken-script-polishSkill
- steve-jobs-perspectiveSkill
- video-packaging-diagnosisSkill
- wechat-draft-publisherSkill
- x-article-publisherSkill
- x-content-mentorSkill
- xhs-image-directorSkill
- xhs-title-selectorSkill
- youmindSkill
- zhang-yiming-perspectiveSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
28 rules. About 0 are common, 26 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈26
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 17
Default to pausing for user confirmation after analysis and structure unless the user explicitly asks for one-pass output.
- Distinctive: line 25
Run the final draft against the brief and the quality checklist.
- Distinctive: line 27
If the user only wants a brief, outline, or structural diagnosis, stop at the relevant stage instead of forcing a full article.
- Distinctive: line 31
Treat these as the default assumptions unless the user says otherwise:
- Distinctive: line 40
Default goal: formal publishable writing, not chat-style rewriting
- Distinctive: line 45
Default process: wait for confirmation after Stage 1 and Stage 2
- Distinctive: line 47
If the user provides an already-approved outline, treat it as Stage 2 input and move to Stage 3 after a lightweight brief alignment.
- Distinctive: line 58
do the relevant analysis for the mode:
- Distinctive: line 76
Read references/workflow.md when the material is fragmented, the thesis is still fuzzy, or the structure is not yet obvious.
- Distinctive: line 80
Use the accepted Stage 1 output to design the writing frame.
- Distinctive: line 82
Do all of the following:
- Very specific: line 93
Use assets/outline-template.md when the user wants a reusable structure blueprint.
- Distinctive: line 105
Write the full article only after the structure is locked.
- Distinctive: line 109
follow the accepted structure instead of improvising a new one
- Distinctive: line 111
remove transcript residue and spoken fillers when they exist
- Distinctive: line 112
keep the author's core meaning intact in source-driven mode
- Distinctive: line 113
keep the improved version aligned with the original draft's intended thesis in draft-deepening mode
- Distinctive: line 114
keep the thesis coherent and non-repetitive in topic-driven mode
- Distinctive: line 117
Read references/quality-bar.md before finalizing the draft.
- Very specific: line 121
Use the staged wrapper in assets/stage-output-template.md unless the user requested another format.
- Distinctive: line 151
keep obvious duplicate viewpoints in separate sections
- Distinctive: line 152
add generic filler that does not deepen the reader's understanding
- Distinctive: line 161
keep the brief as the baseline for structure and drafting decisions
- Distinctive: line 167
Read for mode selection, the full stage checklist, clustering heuristics, topic-driven argument design, one-shot mode, and failure recovery.
- Distinctive: line 169
Read for the final review checklist, spoken-language cleanup rules, topic-writing quality rules, and over-expansion guardrails.
- Distinctive: line 171
Use when drafting the stage-one brief.
- Distinctive: line 173
Use when presenting or locking a reusable structure blueprint.
- Distinctive: line 175
Use when formatting staged outputs and todo-state updates.
≈ “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
Deep Writer
Overview
Handle deep content writing in three common modes:
- source-driven: turn transcripts, notes, interviews, or messy drafts into strong articles
- draft-deepening: take an existing article or outline and make it deeper, clearer, and more complete
- topic-driven: write a deep piece from a topic, thesis, question, angle, or user idea
Default to pausing for user confirmation after analysis and structure unless the user explicitly asks for one-pass output.
Quick Start
- Choose the writing mode before doing anything else.
- Infer the audience, scenario, purpose, and stance before drafting.
- Complete Stage 1 before writing the article body.
- Lock Stage 2 before expanding long-form prose.
- Run the final draft against the brief and the quality checklist.
If the user only wants a brief, outline, or structural diagnosis, stop at the relevant stage instead of forcing a full article.
Default Contract
Treat these as the default assumptions unless the user says otherwise:
- Required: either source material, or a topic / thesis / question / outline to write from
- Optional: supporting materials, target audience, publication scenario, stance, length, depth, tone, and style
- Default mode selection:
- source-driven for transcripts, notes, interviews, speeches, and fragmented material
- draft-deepening for rough drafts, partial articles, and existing outlines
- topic-driven for requests that start from a theme, thesis, question, or desired article idea
- Default language: Chinese
- Default goal: formal publishable writing, not chat-style rewriting
- Default structure policy:
- source-driven: preserve the source's macro frame and allow only micro-adjustments
- draft-deepening: keep the strongest existing frame, then strengthen weak or thin sections
- topic-driven: design the best-fit structure around the brief and thesis
- Default process: wait for confirmation after Stage 1 and Stage 2
If the user provides an already-approved outline, treat it as Stage 2 input and move to Stage 3 after a lightweight brief alignment.
Workflow
Stage 1: Analysis and Planning
Perform all of the following before drafting:
- identify the writing mode
- identify the likely audience, scenario, purpose, and stance
- build a brief using
assets/brief-template.md - do the relevant analysis for the mode:
- source-driven: preprocess spoken-language noise, repetitions, and fragmentary clauses
- draft-deepening: identify weak logic, thin sections, repeated claims, and missing support
- topic-driven: clarify the central question, working thesis, key angles, and likely counterpoints
- extract viewpoint units, argument units, or section units and cluster overlapping ideas
- explain the main logic relations or argument chain
Output at least:
- the brief
- mode diagnosis
- preprocessing notes or argument notes
- viewpoint clusters or argument clusters
- logic chain or logic graph summary
- open questions, evidence gaps, or assumptions when they materially affect the piece
- updated todo status
- a confirmation prompt for the next stage
Read references/workflow.md when the material is fragmented, the thesis is still fuzzy, or the structure is not yet obvious.
Stage 2: Structure Design
Use the accepted Stage 1 output to design the writing frame.
Do all of the following:
- choose the right structure rule for the mode:
- source-driven: preserve the source's core framework unless the user explicitly requests a rewrite
- draft-deepening: keep the strongest existing structure, but rebuild weak branches when the draft cannot support the thesis
- topic-driven: build the strongest structure around the thesis, reader, and scenario
- merge duplicate sections or overlapping arguments
- decide section order with the minimum necessary reordering in source-driven mode, or the clearest reader path in topic-driven mode
- assign each section a clear job, not just a title
- explain which parts were kept and which parts were adjusted
Use assets/outline-template.md when the user wants a reusable structure blueprint.
Output at least:
- the optimized structure
- the role of each section
- notes on preserved versus adjusted structure
- updated todo status
- a confirmation prompt for the next stage
Stage 3: Content Writing
Write the full article only after the structure is locked.
Do all of the following:
- follow the accepted structure instead of improvising a new one
- deepen claims with relevant background, mechanisms, examples, or implications
- remove transcript residue and spoken fillers when they exist
- keep the author's core meaning intact in source-driven mode
- keep the improved version aligned with the original draft's intended thesis in draft-deepening mode
- keep the thesis coherent and non-repetitive in topic-driven mode
- finish with a quality-check summary
Read references/quality-bar.md before finalizing the draft.
Output Format
Use the staged wrapper in assets/stage-output-template.md unless the user requested another format.
Default wrapper:
【阶段X完成】
---
【本阶段输出】
[stage output]
---
【待办事项状态】
- [completed] 第一阶段:分析与规划
- [pending] 第二阶段:结构设计
- [pending] 第三阶段:内容撰写
---
是否继续下一阶段?(输入“继续”进入下一阶段,或提出修改意见)For the final stage, replace the confirmation prompt with a short quality-check summary.
Hard Rules
Do not:
- invent unsupported facts, data, case details, or quotations
- invent a new central thesis that is absent from the source material in source-driven mode
- radically rebuild the structure after Stage 2 is accepted
- keep obvious duplicate viewpoints in separate sections
- add generic filler that does not deepen the reader's understanding
- distort the source's stance in order to sound smoother or more authoritative
- pretend a topic-driven article is well evidenced if the user did not supply evidence and none is available
Always:
- choose the mode explicitly when the request is ambiguous
- make the logic chain visible
- distinguish source viewpoints from supplemental interpretation when that boundary matters
- keep the brief as the baseline for structure and drafting decisions
- state assumptions when the user did not provide audience, scenario, or stance
Resource Map
- references/workflow.md
- Read for mode selection, the full stage checklist, clustering heuristics, topic-driven argument design, one-shot mode, and failure recovery.
- references/quality-bar.md
- Read for the final review checklist, spoken-language cleanup rules, topic-writing quality rules, and over-expansion guardrails.
- assets/brief-template.md
- Use when drafting the stage-one brief.
- assets/outline-template.md
- Use when presenting or locking a reusable structure blueprint.
- assets/stage-output-template.md
- Use when formatting staged outputs and todo-state updates.
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.

