deep-content-writer

Creates engaging, example-driven long-form articles with strong hooks, clear argument structures, and reader retention strategies. Use when the user asks to write an in-depth article, blog post, newsletter, social media thread, or any content that needs to hold readers' attention. Also use when the user says "write an article about [topic]" or "turn these notes into a publishable piece".

aiepco@aiepco

Install

openclaw skills install @aiepco/deep-content-writer

Deep Content Writer v2

A structured system for writing content that readers actually finish. v2 improvement: Depth-first, structure-second.

The structure keeps readers reading. The depth makes them share.

Core Belief

A great article is NOT a template filled with words. It's a specific claim backed by specific evidence, told through story.

Depth comes from three things, in this order:

Specific research (studies, data, names, dates)
Cross-domain connections (linking this topic to an unexpected field)
Structural clarity (making all the above easy to read)

The 6-part arc only solves #3. The skill MUST solve #1 and #2 first.

Phase 0: Knowledge Reconnaissance (MANDATORY)

Before writing a single word, do this:

Step 0a: Deep Dive (self + search)

Ask yourself (the agent/LLM):

"What do I ALREADY know in my training data about this topic?"
List 3-5 concrete studies, experiments, historical events, or named researchers related to this topic
If you can't name specifics, search the web now

Then search the web for:

Recent studies on this topic (last 5 years preferred)
Counterintuitive data points — numbers that surprise people
Named researchers or institutions doing work in this area
Real-world case studies with specific companies, people, or events
Public debates or controversies around this topic

Step 0b: Find the ANTI-Intuition

Every good article challenges a common belief. Find it:

Question	Why it matters
What does "everyone know" about this topic?	That's the straw man to knock down
What's the counterintuitive truth?	That's your article's reason to exist
What would surprise a smart person about this?	That's your hook
What other domain has a parallel pattern?	That's your analogy

If you can't find at least ONE anti-intuition, the article doesn't need to exist yet. Wait, research more.

Step 0c: Specificity Check

For every major claim you plan to make, ask:

text

Claim: "People are bad at estimating their own competence."
→ Specific? No.
→ Fixed: "In 1999, Kruger and Dunning found that the bottom quartile 
   of test scorers rated themselves in the top 60% — a 40-point gap."
→ Now it has names, year, and a number. Ready to write.

Rule: Every paragraph must have at least one specific: a name, a date, a number, a place, or a quote. If a paragraph has none, it's filler — cut or research it.

Phase 1: Writing — The 6-Part Arc

Once you have your research assembled, structure the article:

1. HOOK — Open with a concrete, relatable moment

A specific person in a specific situation
A surprising statistic
A short anecdote

Don't say: "Communication is hard." Do say: "A Stanford researcher once asked people to tap a song on a table. The tappers thought listeners would guess the song 50% of the time. The real number: 2.5%."

The hook must be SPECIFIC to earn its place. No generic openings.

2. DEFINE — State the concept in one compelling sentence

Define through contrast, not dictionary:

"It's not [what people think]. It's [what it actually is]."

Example:

"It's not that experts are bad teachers. It's that once you know something, you literally cannot imagine what it's like not to know it."

Then expand for 1-2 paragraphs with the research foundation.

3. THE MECHANISM — Why does this happen?

This is where your research pays off:

Which cognitive bias or psychological mechanism is at work?
Who discovered/studied it? When? What did they find?
What evolutionary or structural reason explains it?

If you don't have a named study or researcher here, stop and search. This section is the backbone of the article's authority.

4. EXAMPLES — 2-3 concrete scenarios

Each example must be a MINI-STORY:

Example 1: Everyday life (reader thinks "that's me!")
Example 2: Professional/work context (reader thinks "that's my coworker!")
Counter-example: What happens when someone does it RIGHT

Each example: 1-2 paragraphs, with specific details (names, quotes, dialogue, situations).

5. TAKEAWAY — What the reader can DO

3-5 actionable, specific pieces of advice.

Each takeaway must pass the "So what?" test:

❌ "Communicate better."
✅ "Before explaining anything, ask yourself: what does this person already know? Start there, not at the beginning."

6. CLOSE — Circle back, provoke

Reference the hook
Leave the reader with a question or challenge
Invite discussion with a specific question

Phase 2: Depth Techniques (The real skill)

These techniques separate good AI writing from great writing. They MUST be applied during and after drafting.

Technique 1: The Specificity Pass

After drafting the article, scan every paragraph. If any paragraph lacks a proper noun (name), a number (date/percentage/amount), or a direct quote, tag it as WEAK. Then either:

Research and add a specific reference
Or remove the paragraph entirely

Technique 2: Cross-Domain Connection

Find ONE unexpected connection to another domain:

If writing about psychology, connect it to programming (e.g., "This is like off-by-one errors in code")
If writing about business, connect it to sports or nature
If writing about technology, connect it to ancient history

The cross-domain connection is often what makes an article memorable and shareable.

Technique 3: The Opposite Angle

For each section, ask: "What would someone argue against this?" Then address that counter-argument. This signals depth because it shows you've considered the full picture, not just your own view.

Place the counter-argument either:

Within the relevant section ("You might think X, but that misses Y.")
Or as a dedicated section before the close.

Technique 4: Multi-Level Language

Mix three levels of language within the article:

Level	Use	Example
Academic	When citing research	"Kahneman and Tversky (1979) demonstrated..."
Conversational	When telling stories	"Sound familiar?"
Provocative	When making the point	"Here's the uncomfortable truth: you're not as good at this as you think."

Variety in register signals author sophistication.

Technique 5: The "So What?" Audit

After each section, literally ask: "So what?" If the answer is not obvious from the text itself, rewrite or remove that section.

Platform-Specific Adaptations

知乎

First-person stories welcome
成语/典故 add credibility for Chinese audiences
Reference Chinese internet culture
Close: "关注我，了解更多..." + discussion question
Length: 3000-8000 characters

头条/百家号

Paragraphs: 1-3 sentences max
Emotional hooks front-loaded
Numbers in titles: "3个..." "5种方法..."
Image suggestions embedded
Close: Strong CTA + follow reminder
Length: 1500-4000 characters

Blog/Newsletter

Footnotes and references welcome
Subheadings for scannability
Personal voice
Length: 1500-4000 words

Twitter/X Thread

Each "paragraph" = 1 tweet (≤280 chars)
Numbered: 1/10, 2/10...
First tweet = self-contained hook
Last tweet = summar + share prompt
1-2 relevant hashtags max

Facebook

Conversational, starts with personal experience
Emoji for emotional tone (not decoration)
Question at end to spark comments
Reaction prompts: 👍 / 💬 / 🔔
Length: 500-1500 words

Title Crafting

Generate 3-5 title options. For each, explain WHY it works:

Effective patterns:

Curiosity gap: "Why [common thing] is actually [counterintuitive truth]"
Direct address: "If you're a [role], stop doing [thing]"
Number + benefit: "5 ways to [achieve goal] without [pain point]"
Challenge: "Everything you know about [topic] is wrong"
Question: "Why does [problem] keep happening to you?"

Criteria: Click-worthy + Accurate + Platform-appropriate

Quality Checklist

Before outputting the article, verify:

Phase 0 completed: at least 2 specific studies/experiments cited
Every paragraph has a specific (name, number, date, or quote)
At least one cross-domain connection found
Counter-argument addressed somewhere
Language varies (academic ↔ conversational ↔ provocative)
First paragraph is a concrete scene or specific stat, NOT "In this article"
Last paragraph circles back to the hook
Platform-specific elements added

If any box is unchecked, fix it before delivering the article.

When NOT to use this skill

User only wants a summary or outline
Technical documentation (API docs, READMEs)
User says "keep it short" or "just the facts"
Formal academic papers or legal documents
User has supplied no topic and no direction