Claude
Skills
Sign in
Back

content-research-writer

Included with Lifetime
$97 forever

Use when the user needs research methodology, long-form content creation, academic-style citations, fact-checking, or evidence-based writing with proper source attribution. Trigger conditions: whitepaper drafting, research article writing, source evaluation, citation management, fact-checking protocol, case study creation, evidence-based argumentation.

Writing & Docs

What this skill does


# Content Research Writer

## Overview

Produce well-researched, authoritative long-form content with proper source attribution, structured argumentation, and evidence-based claims. This skill covers research methodology, source evaluation, citation management, outline construction, drafting workflows, fact-checking protocols, and publishing-ready formatting for articles, whitepapers, reports, and educational content.

Apply this skill whenever content must be backed by evidence, cited properly, and structured for credibility with expert audiences.

## Multi-Phase Process

### Phase 1: Research Planning

1. Define the topic scope and target audience
2. Identify key questions the content must answer
3. Determine content type (article, whitepaper, case study, guide)
4. Set word count target and depth level
5. Establish credibility requirements (peer-reviewed, industry reports, primary data)
6. Create a research timeline with milestones

> **STOP — Do NOT begin source discovery until the research plan is documented and scope is agreed upon.**

### Phase 2: Source Discovery and Evaluation

1. Search academic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, JSTOR, arXiv)
2. Identify industry reports and authoritative publications
3. Find primary sources (official documentation, datasets, specifications)
4. Evaluate source credibility using the CRAAP test (see table below)
5. Organize sources in a reference manager or structured format
6. Extract key findings, statistics, and quotable passages

> **STOP — Do NOT begin outlining until you have sufficient Tier 1-2 sources for every core claim.**

### Phase 3: Outline and Structure

1. Create a thesis statement or central argument
2. Build hierarchical outline with main sections and subsections
3. Map evidence to each section (which sources support which claims)
4. Identify gaps requiring additional research
5. Define transitions between sections for narrative flow
6. Plan visual elements (tables, charts, diagrams, callouts)

> **STOP — Do NOT begin drafting until the outline is reviewed and evidence gaps are filled.**

### Phase 4: Drafting

1. Write section by section following the outline
2. Integrate citations as you write (never retrofit)
3. Balance original analysis with supporting evidence
4. Use topic sentences and clear paragraph structure
5. Include concrete examples, data points, and case studies
6. Write introduction last (after body is complete)

> **STOP — Do NOT move to review until all sections are drafted and all citations are in place.**

### Phase 5: Review and Fact-Check

1. Verify every factual claim against its source
2. Check all statistics for accuracy and context
3. Ensure citations are complete and correctly formatted
4. Review for logical consistency and argument strength
5. Proofread for clarity, grammar, and style
6. Have subject matter expert review if possible

## Content Type Decision Table

| Content Type | Word Count | Research Depth | Audience | Citation Style |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog article | 1,500-3,000 | Tier 2-3 sources | General | Inline links |
| Long-form article | 3,000-5,000 | Tier 1-3 sources | Informed readers | Parenthetical (APA) |
| Whitepaper | 3,000-8,000 | Tier 1-2 mandatory | Decision-makers | Footnotes or numbered |
| Case study | 1,000-2,500 | Primary + Tier 2 | Buyers | Inline attribution |
| Technical report | 5,000-15,000 | Tier 1 mandatory | Experts | IEEE or APA |
| Educational guide | 2,000-6,000 | Tier 1-3 mixed | Learners | Parenthetical |

## Source Evaluation Framework (CRAAP Test)

| Criterion | Questions to Ask | Red Flags |
|---|---|---|
| **Currency** | When was it published? Updated? | > 5 years old for fast-moving topics |
| **Relevance** | Does it directly address your topic? | Tangential connection, different context |
| **Authority** | Who is the author? What are their credentials? | No author, no institutional affiliation |
| **Accuracy** | Is it supported by evidence? Peer-reviewed? | No citations, unverifiable claims |
| **Purpose** | Why does this exist? Inform, sell, persuade? | Strong commercial bias, advocacy without disclosure |

### Source Tier System

| Tier | Source Type | Credibility | Use For |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | Peer-reviewed journals, official standards | Highest | Core claims, statistics |
| Tier 2 | Industry reports (Gartner, McKinsey), textbooks | High | Market data, frameworks |
| Tier 3 | Reputable news outlets, official documentation | Good | Context, current events |
| Tier 4 | Expert blogs, conference talks, interviews | Moderate | Perspectives, opinions |
| Tier 5 | Social media, forums, Wikipedia | Low | Discovery only, never cite directly |

## Citation Formats

### Inline Citation Styles
```markdown
# Parenthetical (APA-style)
Research shows that 73% of enterprises have adopted cloud-native architectures
(Smith & Johnson, 2025).

# Narrative
According to Smith and Johnson (2025), 73% of enterprises have adopted
cloud-native architectures.

# Footnote-style (Chicago)
Research shows significant cloud adoption.[^1]

[^1]: Smith, J., & Johnson, R. (2025). Cloud adoption trends.
*Journal of Cloud Computing*, 12(3), 45-62.

# Numbered (IEEE-style)
Research shows significant cloud adoption [1].

## References
[1] J. Smith and R. Johnson, "Cloud adoption trends," *J. Cloud Computing*,
    vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 45-62, 2025.
```

### Reference Format Templates
```markdown
# Journal Article
Author, A. B., & Author, C. D. (Year). Title of article. *Journal Name*,
Volume(Issue), Pages. https://doi.org/xxxxx

# Book
Author, A. B. (Year). *Title of book* (Edition). Publisher.

# Website
Author or Organization. (Year, Month Day). Title of page. Site Name.
https://www.example.com/page

# Report
Organization. (Year). *Title of report* (Report No. XXX).
https://www.example.com/report.pdf
```

## Content Structure Templates

### Long-Form Article (2000-5000 words)
```
1. Hook / Opening Anecdote (100-200 words)
2. Context and Problem Statement (200-300 words)
3. Thesis / Key Insight (50-100 words)
4. Section 1: Background (400-600 words)
   - Historical context
   - Current state
   - Key definitions
5. Section 2: Core Analysis (600-1000 words)
   - Main argument with evidence
   - Data and statistics
   - Expert perspectives
6. Section 3: Implications (400-600 words)
   - Practical applications
   - Case studies
   - Future outlook
7. Section 4: Counterarguments (200-400 words)
   - Acknowledge limitations
   - Address objections
8. Conclusion (200-300 words)
   - Synthesize key findings
   - Call to action or forward-looking statement
9. References
```

### Whitepaper (3000-8000 words)
```
1. Executive Summary (300-500 words)
2. Introduction and Problem Statement (500-800 words)
3. Methodology (300-500 words)
4. Findings / Analysis (1500-3000 words)
   - Section with data visualization
   - Comparative analysis
   - Case studies
5. Recommendations (500-1000 words)
6. Conclusion (300-500 words)
7. Appendices
8. References
```

### Case Study (1000-2500 words)
```
1. Executive Summary (100-200 words)
2. Challenge / Problem (200-400 words)
3. Approach / Solution (300-600 words)
4. Implementation (300-500 words)
5. Results and Metrics (200-400 words)
6. Lessons Learned (200-300 words)
7. About [Company/Subject]
```

## Writing Quality Checklist

### Paragraph Level
- Each paragraph has a clear topic sentence
- Paragraphs are 3-6 sentences (avoid walls of text)
- Transitions connect paragraphs logically
- Evidence follows claims immediately

### Sentence Level
- Vary sentence length (mix short and long)
- Active voice preferred over passive
- Avoid jargon without definition
- Concrete language over abstract

### Document Level
- Introduction establishes the "so what" clearly
- Each section advances the central argument
- No unsupported claims
- Conclusion adds value (doesn't just repeat)
- Consistent tone and reading level throughout

## Fact-Checking Protocol

### Verification Steps
1. **Primary source check**: Trace every claim

Related in Writing & Docs