research-documentation
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseContent Research Writer
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.
这个Skill可作为你的写作搭档,帮助你进行研究、搭建大纲、撰写草稿并优化内容,同时保留你独特的写作风格与语调。
When to Use This Skill
何时使用该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
- 撰写博客文章、专栏文章或新闻通讯
- 创建教育类内容或教程
- 起草思想领导力文章
- 研究并撰写案例研究
- 生成带来源标注的技术文档
- 撰写包含规范引用与参考文献的内容
- 优化文章开头的钩子,提升吸引力
- 写作时获取逐节反馈
What This Skill Does
该Skill能实现什么
- Collaborative Outlining: Helps you structure ideas into coherent outlines
- Research Assistance: Finds relevant information and adds citations
- Hook Improvement: Strengthens your opening to capture attention
- Section Feedback: Reviews each section as you write
- Voice Preservation: Maintains your writing style and tone
- Citation Management: Adds and formats references properly
- Iterative Refinement: Helps you improve through multiple drafts
- 协作式大纲搭建:帮助你将想法梳理为连贯的大纲
- 研究辅助:查找相关信息并添加引用标注
- 钩子优化:强化文章开头,吸引读者注意力
- 逐节反馈:在你写作时审阅每一部分内容
- 风格保留:维持你的写作风格与语调
- 引用管理:正确添加并格式化参考文献
- 迭代优化:通过多轮草稿帮助你提升内容质量
How to Use
使用方法
Setup Your Writing Environment
搭建写作环境
Create a dedicated folder for your article:
mkdir ~/writing/my-article-title
cd ~/writing/my-article-titleCreate your draft file:
touch article-draft.mdOpen Claude Code from this directory and start writing.
为你的文章创建专属文件夹:
mkdir ~/writing/my-article-title
cd ~/writing/my-article-title创建草稿文件:
touch article-draft.md从该目录打开Claude Code并开始写作。
Basic Workflow
基础工作流
- Start with an outline:
Help me create an outline for an article about [topic]- Research and add citations:
Research [specific topic] and add citations to my outline- Improve the hook:
Here's my introduction. Help me make the hook more compelling.- Get section feedback:
I just finished the "Why This Matters" section. Review it and give feedback.- Refine and polish:
Review the full draft for flow, clarity, and consistency.- 从搭建大纲开始:
帮我创建一篇关于[主题]的文章大纲- 研究并添加引用:
研究[特定主题]并为我的大纲添加引用- 优化文章钩子:
这是我的文章引言,帮我让钩子更有吸引力。- 获取逐节反馈:
我刚写完“为什么这很重要”部分,帮我审阅并给出反馈。- 优化打磨内容:
审阅完整草稿,检查逻辑流畅度、清晰度与一致性。Instructions
操作说明
When a user requests writing assistance:
-
Understand the Writing ProjectAsk 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)
-
Collaborative OutliningHelp structure the content:markdown
# 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
-
Conduct ResearchWhen user requests research on a topic:
- Search for relevant information
- Find credible sources
- Extract key facts, quotes, and data
- Add citations in requested format
Example output:markdown## 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. -
Improve HooksWhen user shares an introduction, analyze and strengthen:Current Hook Analysis:
- What works: [positive elements]
- What could be stronger: [areas for improvement]
- Emotional impact: [current vs. potential]
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:- Does it create curiosity?
- Does it promise value?
- Is it specific enough?
- Does it match the audience?
-
Provide Section-by-Section FeedbackAs user writes each section, review for:markdown
# 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! -
Preserve Writer's VoiceImportant principles:
- 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
Ask periodically:- "Does this sound like you?"
- "Is this the right tone?"
- "Should I be more/less [formal/casual/technical]?"
-
Citation ManagementHandle references based on user preference:Inline Citations:markdown
Studies show 40% productivity improvement (McKinsey, 2024).Numbered References:markdownStudies show 40% productivity improvement [1]. [1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...Footnote Style:markdownStudies show 40% productivity improvement^1 ^1: McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...Maintain a running citations list:markdown## References 1. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication. 2. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication. ... -
Final Review and PolishWhen draft is complete, provide comprehensive feedback:markdown
# 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! 🚀
当用户请求写作协助时:
-
理解写作项目需求提出明确问题以厘清需求:
- 文章主题与核心论点是什么?
- 目标受众是谁?
- 期望的篇幅与格式是什么?
- 写作目标是什么?(教育、说服、娱乐、解释)
- 是否有需要纳入的现有研究或资料来源?
- 你的写作风格是什么?(正式、口语化、技术向)
-
协作式大纲搭建帮助梳理内容结构:markdown
# 文章大纲:[标题] ## 钩子 - [开篇语句/故事/统计数据] - [读者为何需要关注] ## 引言 - 背景信息 - 问题陈述 - 文章涵盖内容 ## 主体部分 ### 第一部分:[标题] - 核心要点A - 核心要点B - 示例/证据 - [需研究:特定主题] ### 第二部分:[标题] - 核心要点C - 核心要点D - 需补充数据/引用 ### 第三部分:[标题] - 核心要点E - 反方论点 - 结论 ## 结尾 - 核心要点总结 - 行动号召 - 最终思考 ## 研究待办 - [ ] 查找[主题]相关数据 - [ ] 收集[概念]相关示例 - [ ] 为[主张]添加引用来源迭代优化大纲:- 根据反馈调整结构
- 确保逻辑流畅
- 识别研究缺口
- 标记需要深入探讨的部分
-
开展研究工作当用户请求针对某一主题进行研究时:
- 搜索相关信息
- 寻找可信来源
- 提取关键事实、引用与数据
- 按照要求格式添加引用
输出示例:markdown## 研究:AI对生产力的影响 核心发现: 1. **生产力提升**:研究显示内容创作任务可节省40%的时间 [1] 2. **采用率**:67%的知识工作者每周使用AI工具 [2] 3. **专家观点**:“AI是对人类创造力的增强而非替代” - 麻省理工学院Jane Smith博士 [3] 引用来源: [1] 麦肯锡全球研究院. (2024). 《生成式AI的经济潜力》 [2] Stack Overflow开发者调查(2024) [3] Smith, J. (2024). 麻省理工科技评论访谈 已添加至大纲第二部分。 -
优化文章钩子当用户分享引言内容时,分析并强化钩子:当前钩子分析:
- 亮点:[积极元素]
- 可提升点:[改进方向]
- 情感影响:[当前效果 vs 潜在效果]
替代方案建议:方案1:[大胆陈述][示例] 为何有效:[解释]方案2:[个人故事][示例] 为何有效:[解释]方案3:[惊人数据][示例] 为何有效:[解释]钩子评估问题:- 是否能引发好奇心?
- 是否能传递价值?
- 是否足够具体?
- 是否匹配受众?
-
提供逐节反馈当用户完成每一部分写作后,从以下维度审阅:markdown
# 反馈:[章节名称] ## 亮点 ✓ - [优势1] - [优势2] - [优势3] ## 改进建议 ### 清晰度 - [具体问题] → [建议修正方案] - [复杂语句] → [简化版本] ### 流畅度 - [过渡问题] → [更好的衔接方式] - [段落顺序] → [建议调整顺序] ### 证据支撑 - [缺乏支撑的主张] → [添加引用或示例] - [通用表述] → [建议更具体] ### 风格 - [语调不一致] → [建议匹配你的风格] - [用词] → [更合适的替代词] ## 具体语句修改 原文: > [草稿中的原文引用] 修改建议: > [优化版本] 原因:[解释] ## 思考问题 - [启发性问题1] - [启发性问题2] 准备好进入下一部分了! -
保留作者写作风格重要原则:
- 学习作者风格:阅读现有写作样本
- 提供建议而非替代:给出选项,而非指令
- 匹配语调:正式、随意、技术向、友好
- 尊重选择:如果用户偏好自己的版本,给予支持
- 优化而非改写:让内容更好,而非改变风格
定期询问:- “这听起来像你的风格吗?”
- “这个语调合适吗?”
- “我应该更[正式/口语化/技术向]一些吗?”
-
引用管理根据用户偏好处理参考文献:内联引用:markdown
研究显示生产力提升了40% (McKinsey, 2024)。编号引用:markdown研究显示生产力提升了40% [1]。 [1] 麦肯锡全球研究院. (2024)...脚注风格:markdown研究显示生产力提升了40%^1 ^1: 麦肯锡全球研究院. (2024)...维护动态引用列表:markdown## 参考文献 1. 作者. (年份). 《标题》. 出版物. 2. 作者. (年份). 《标题》. 出版物. ... -
最终审阅与打磨当草稿完成后,提供全面反馈:markdown
# 完整草稿审阅 ## 整体评估 **优势**: - [主要优势1] - [主要优势2] - [主要优势3] **影响力**:[整体效果评估] ## 结构与流畅度 - [组织结构评价] - [过渡效果评价] - [节奏评估] ## 内容质量 - [论点强度] - [证据充分性] - [示例有效性] ## 技术质量 - 语法与格式:[评估] - 一致性:[评估] - 引用:[完整性检查] ## 可读性 - 清晰度评分:[评价] - 句式多样性:[评价] - 段落长度:[评价] ## 最终打磨建议 1. **引言**:[具体改进建议] 2. **主体**:[具体改进建议] 3. **结尾**:[具体改进建议] 4. **标题**:[如有需要提供替代选项] ## 发布前检查清单 - [ ] 所有主张均有来源 - [ ] 引用格式正确 - [ ] 示例清晰 - [ ] 过渡流畅 - [ ] 包含行动号召 - [ ] 校对拼写错误 准备发布! 🚀
Examples
示例
Example 1: Teresa Torres's Workflow
示例1:Teresa Torres的工作流
User: "I'm writing an article about continuous discovery. Help me create an outline."
Process:
- Collaborates on outline structure
- Identifies research needs
- User starts writing introduction
- Reviews and improves the hook
- User writes each section
- Provides feedback after each section
- Conducts research and adds citations
- Final review of complete draft
- Polish and prep for publishing
Result: Well-researched, properly cited article written in Teresa's voice with strong structure and flow.
用户:“我正在写一篇关于持续发现的文章,帮我创建一个大纲。”
流程:
- 协作搭建大纲结构
- 确定研究需求
- 用户开始撰写引言
- 审阅并优化钩子
- 用户撰写各章节
- 每完成一部分就提供反馈
- 开展研究并添加引用
- 完整草稿的最终审阅
- 打磨并准备发布
结果:一篇研究充分、引用规范的文章,保留了Teresa的写作风格,结构清晰、逻辑流畅。
Example 2: Research-Heavy Article
示例2:研究密集型文章
User: "I'm writing about AI's impact on product management. Help me find current data and examples."
Output:
markdown
undefined用户:“我正在写一篇关于AI对产品管理影响的文章,帮我查找最新数据和示例。”
输出:
markdown
undefinedResearch Compiled
整理的研究资料
Recent Data
最新数据
- 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]
- Gartner:到2025年,80%的产品经理将使用AI工具 [1]
- 调查:45%的受访者表示AI加快了功能交付速度 [2]
- 案例研究:Airbnb的AI辅助优先级排序 [3]
Expert Quotes
专家观点
- "AI amplifies PM judgment, not replaces it" - Marty Cagan
- [Additional quotes with citations]
- “AI是对产品经理判断力的增强,而非替代” - Marty Cagan
- [更多带引用的观点]
Real Examples
实际案例
-
Company A: Used AI for user research synthesis
- Result: 60% time savings
- Source: [citation]
-
Company B: AI-powered roadmap analysis
- Result: Better stakeholder alignment
- Source: [citation]
All added to your outline with proper citations.
undefined-
公司A:使用AI进行用户研究整合
- 结果:节省60%的时间
- 来源:[引用]
-
公司B:AI驱动的路线图分析
- 结果:提升了利益相关者的对齐度
- 来源:[引用]
所有内容已添加至你的大纲并附上规范引用。
undefinedExample 3: Hook Improvement
示例3:钩子优化
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."
用户原文钩子:
“产品管理正因AI而发生变化。在本文中,我将讨论AI影响产品经理的几种方式。”
优化后的选项:
选项1(数据驱动):
“上个月,我让AI分析了500份用户访谈,原本需要3周的工作只花了30分钟。产品管理的未来将彻底改变。”
选项2(提问式):
“如果在喝早咖啡之前,你就能与每一位用户交流、阅读每一条评论、分析每一张支持工单,会怎么样?”
选项3(故事式):
“Sarah花了两周时间开发了一个错误的功能。不是因为她不了解用户,而是因为她无法快速处理数百份访谈以发现规律。”
Example 4: Section Feedback
示例4:章节反馈
User: "Just finished my 'Common Mistakes' section. Thoughts?"
Response:
markdown
undefined用户:“我刚写完‘常见误区’部分,帮我看看怎么样?”
回复:
markdown
undefinedFeedback: Common Mistakes Section
反馈:常见误区章节
What Works Well ✓
亮点 ✓
- Strong examples (the Slack notification story)
- Clear structure (3 mistakes, clean layout)
- Practical advice for each mistake
- 示例很有说服力(Slack通知的故事)
- 结构清晰(3个误区,布局简洁)
- 每个误区都配有实用建议
Suggestions
改进建议
Make It More Specific
让内容更具体
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."
你的第二个要点提到“优先级设置错误”,可以更明确:
原文:
“许多团队因关注功能而非结果而优先级设置错误。”
修改建议:
“我见过有些团队一个季度发布了14个功能,但核心指标毫无起色。他们把活动量当成了进展。”
Add Data
添加数据支撑
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]"
第三个误区可以补充证据:
“[添加引用]:研究显示,不与用户定期沟通的团队开发无用功能的概率是其他团队的3倍 [需来源]”
Flow Improvement
优化流畅度
Consider reordering: Mistake 3 → Mistake 2 → Mistake 1
This builds from small to big impact.
Ready for the next section!
undefined考虑调整顺序:误区3 → 误区2 → 误区1
这样可以按照影响从小到大的逻辑推进。
准备好进入下一部分了!
undefinedWriting Workflows
写作工作流
Blog Post Workflow
博客文章工作流
- Outline together
- Research key points
- Write introduction → get feedback
- Write body sections → feedback each
- Write conclusion → final review
- Polish and edit
- 协作搭建大纲
- 研究核心要点
- 撰写引言 → 获取反馈
- 撰写主体章节 → 逐节获取反馈
- 撰写结尾 → 最终审阅
- 打磨编辑
Newsletter Workflow
新闻通讯工作流
- Discuss hook ideas
- Quick outline (shorter format)
- Draft in one session
- Review for clarity and links
- Quick polish
- 讨论钩子思路
- 快速搭建大纲(短格式)
- 一次性完成草稿
- 审阅清晰度与链接
- 快速打磨
Technical Tutorial Workflow
技术教程工作流
- Outline steps
- Write code examples
- Add explanations
- Test instructions
- Add troubleshooting section
- Final review for accuracy
- 梳理步骤大纲
- 编写代码示例
- 添加解释说明
- 测试操作步骤
- 添加故障排除部分
- 最终审阅确保准确性
Thought Leadership Workflow
思想领导力文章工作流
- Brainstorm unique angle
- Research existing perspectives
- Develop your thesis
- Write with strong POV
- Add supporting evidence
- Craft compelling conclusion
- 头脑风暴独特视角
- 研究现有观点
- 确立核心论点
- 以明确观点撰写
- 添加支撑证据
- 打造有说服力的结尾
Pro Tips
专业技巧
- Work in VS Code: Better than web Claude for long-form writing
- One section at a time: Get feedback incrementally
- Save research separately: Keep a research.md file
- Version your drafts: article-v1.md, article-v2.md, etc.
- Read aloud: Use feedback to identify clunky sentences
- Set deadlines: "I want to finish the draft today"
- Take breaks: Write, get feedback, pause, revise
- 使用VS Code:比网页版Claude更适合长篇写作
- 逐节推进:逐步获取反馈
- 单独保存研究资料:维护一个research.md文件
- 版本化草稿:使用article-v1.md、article-v2.md等命名
- 大声朗读:通过反馈识别拗口的句子
- 设置截止日期:“我想今天完成草稿”
- 适当休息:写作、获取反馈、暂停、修改
File Organization
文件组织
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推荐的写作项目文件结构:
~/writing/article-name/
├── outline.md # 你的大纲
├── research.md # 所有研究资料与引用
├── draft-v1.md # 第一版草稿
├── draft-v2.md # 修订版草稿
├── final.md # 可发布版本
├── feedback.md # 收集的反馈
└── sources/ # 参考资料
├── study1.pdf
└── article2.mdBest Practices
最佳实践
For Research
研究方面
- Verify sources before citing
- Use recent data when possible
- Balance different perspectives
- Link to original sources
- 引用前验证来源可信度
- 尽可能使用最新数据
- 平衡不同观点
- 链接到原始来源
For Feedback
反馈方面
- 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?"
- 明确你的需求:“这部分是不是太技术化了?”
- 分享你的顾虑:“我担心这部分太拖沓”
- 提出具体问题:“逻辑流畅吗?”
- 请求替代方案:“还有什么其他方式可以解释这个?”
For Voice
风格方面
- Share examples of your writing
- Specify tone preferences
- Point out good matches: "That sounds like me!"
- Flag mismatches: "Too formal for my style"
- 分享你的写作示例
- 明确语调偏好
- 指出匹配的风格:“这听起来像我!”
- 标记不匹配的部分:“对我来说太正式了”
Related Use Cases
相关使用场景
- 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
- 从文章生成社交媒体帖子
- 为不同受众调整内容
- 撰写电子邮件新闻通讯
- 起草技术文档
- 创建演示文稿内容
- 撰写案例研究
- 开发课程大纲