agentleFS
gokulsvisiongokulsvision/Crewm8-Social-Media-Manager-Skill-Graph/skills/strategy/content-pillars/SKILL.md

content-pillars

Skill17 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Define 3-5 content pillars and a topic taxonomy that translates brand positioning into repeatable content categories the agent can generate against every week without running out of ideas.

  • Reads credentials

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    After positioning is locked, before the first calendar

    line 29

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Content Pillars

Transform brand positioning into 3-5 repeatable content categories (pillars). Each pillar is a lens through which the brand talks about the world. The topic taxonomy underneath ensures the agent never runs out of specific, on-brand ideas.

Purpose

Without pillars, content is random. With pillars, every post has a job: educate, persuade, prove, humanize, or convert. Pillars make the content calendar fillable without creativity blocks, and they make the brand's feed feel cohesive instead of scattershot.

When to Use

  • After positioning is locked, before the first calendar
  • Content feels repetitive or scattered
  • Quarterly strategy refresh
  • Expanding to a new platform
  • Founder says "I don't know what to post about"

Inputs Required

  • Positioning statement (from positioning-statement skill)
  • Brand voice guide (from brand-voice-system skill)
  • Customer interview insights or audience pain points
  • Competitor content audit (what's working for them)
  • Platform strategy (which platforms are active)

Quick Reference

Pillar TypePurposeExample TopicsBest Formats
Education / How-toTeach something valuableFrameworks, step-by-step guides, mistakes to avoidThreads, carousels, how-to videos
Point of View / ContrarianShare a differentiated opinionHot takes, industry myths, "unpopular opinion"Short posts, quote tweets, opinion threads
Proof / Social ProofShow the thing worksCase studies, results, revenue updates, customer storiesMetric-led posts, testimonial graphics
Behind the Scenes / Build-in-PublicHumanize the brandTeam culture, process, failures, lessons learned, "how it's going"Photo + caption, process videos, raw updates
CTA / ConversionDrive actionProduct launches, demo requests, waitlists, newsletter signupsLaunch posts, demo clips, link posts

Procedure

  1. Start with the positioning statement. For each potential pillar, ask: "Does content in this pillar reinforce the brand's core message?" If the answer is "not really," that pillar doesn't belong.
  2. Define 3-5 pillars. Each pillar gets:
    • A name (1-3 words)
    • A one-sentence description of what content in this pillar does
    • A target split (% of weekly output)
    • 10-15 specific topic ideas (not templates — actual topics that could be posts)
    • The target emotional response: do we want the reader to think, feel, or act?
  3. Map each pillar to the right formats:
    • Education: threads, carousels, how-to videos, LinkedIn carousels
    • POV: short takes, quote tweets, contrarian threads, LinkedIn opinion posts
    • Proof: case study posts, metric screenshots, testimonial graphics, revenue update threads
    • BTS: photo + caption, process videos, unfiltered updates, TikTok POV content
    • CTA: launch announcements, link posts, demo clips, waitlist pages
  4. Map each pillar to the right platforms:
    • Education dominates LinkedIn and X
    • POV lives primarily on X (and occasionally LinkedIn)
    • BTS thrives on IG Stories and TikTok
    • Proof works everywhere but lands differently (metrics on X, stories on LinkedIn)
    • CTA works where the audience already trusts you — earn it with other pillars first
  5. Define the pillar mix (recommended starting point, adjust per data):
    • Education: 35% of weekly output
    • POV: 25%
    • Proof: 20%
    • BTS: 15%
    • CTA: 5% (you earn the right to ask)
  6. Build a 15-topic bank per pillar. Topics should be specific, not generic. Bad: "SaaS tips." Good: "Why charging monthly killed our growth (and what we switched to)."
  7. Set pillar health check rules:
    • Any pillar exceeding 50% of weekly output? Rebalance.
    • Any pillar with zero posts this week? Fill it.
    • Any pillar consistently underperforming (below average ER for 3+ weeks)? Diagnose or retire.

Output Format

# [Brand] Content Pillars — [Date]

## Pillar 1: [Name]
**Goal:** [What this content achieves for the audience and the brand]
**Target split:** [X]% of weekly output
**Best formats:** [List 2-3]
**Platform priority:** [Platform A > Platform B > ...]
**Emotional target:** [Think / Feel / Act]

### Topic Bank (15 ideas)
1. [Specific, actionable topic]
2. [Specific, actionable topic]
...15

## Pillar 2: [Name]
...

## Pillar Mix Target
| Pillar | % of Weekly | X | LinkedIn | IG | TikTok |
|--------|------------|---|---|-----|--------|
| Education | 35% | Threads | Carousels | Carousels | How-tos |
| POV | 25% | Short posts | Opinion posts | — | Reaction videos |
| Proof | 20% | Metric posts | Case studies | Testimonials | — |
| BTS | 15% | Photo posts | — | Stories | POV clips |
| CTA | 5% | Launch posts | Demos | — | — |

## Pillar Health Check (Review Monthly)
- Which pillar drives the most engagement?
- Which pillar drives the most conversions?
- Which pillar is underrepresented or overperforming?
- Is any pillar below average ER for 3+ weeks? Diagnose.

Done Criteria

The skill is complete when:

  1. 3-5 pillars are defined with names, goals, and target splits
  2. Each pillar has 10-15 specific topic ideas (not generic categories)
  3. Each pillar is mapped to formats and platforms
  4. The pillar mix totals 100% and is actionable
  5. The health check rules are documented

Pitfalls

  • More than 5 pillars dilutes everything — the audience can't tell what you stand for
  • Pillars that are too broad ("Business Advice") are useless as a filter
  • Same pillar mix on every platform (X is not LinkedIn is not TikTok)
  • CTA content without scaffolding from other pillars (you can't ask before you give)
  • Topic banks that run dry in 2 weeks (aim for 15 topics per pillar — that's 3 months of material before repeating)

Verification

Map the last 2 weeks of posts to pillars. If more than 20% don't fit any pillar, the taxonomy is wrong. If one pillar exceeds 50% of output, rebalance. Can you look at the topic bank and immediately write a post from any topic? If a topic makes you think "I have nothing to say about this," it's not specific enough.

Example

Input: SaaS analytics tool positioning = "Product analytics for B2B founders who hate dashboards."

Output:

  • Pillar 1 (Education): "Product analytics that actually matter" — topics: 3 metrics that predict churn, why DAU is a vanity metric, how to set up your first retention cohort
  • Pillar 2 (POV): "Unpopular analytics takes" — topics: why dashboard tools make worse decisions, the metric VCs care about that you're ignoring
  • Pillar 3 (Proof): "Customer results" — topics: how [customer] reduced churn 40%, revenue impact of fixing onboarding drop-off
  • Pillar 4 (BTS): "Building an analytics company" — topics: why we rebuilt our data pipeline, the feature customers begged for that we said no to
  • Pillar 5 (CTA): "Try it" — topics: free trial launch, comparison vs. competitors, feature deep-dives

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.