idea-to-post
Expand scattered ideas into in-depth posts. Use this skill when users need to "expand ideas," "generate posts," "brainstorm content," "writing assistance," "enrich thoughts," "deepen thinking," or provide scattered ideas that need systematic expression.
What this skill does
# Idea-to-Post Expansion Skill
## Skill Overview
This skill helps you expand scattered ideas (a sentence, a few words, a vague thought) into **90+ point** social media posts.
**Target Positioning: Quality social media content, not technical documentation**
It works through the following ways:
1. **Framework Internalization** - Use thinking frameworks to design questions, but don't mechanically apply them
2. **Information Search & Integration** - Automatically search for high-quality materials, supplement relevant data and cases
3. **Progressive Deep Questioning** - Multiple-choice to set direction + open questions to enrich content, **7-10 rounds of dialogue** until complete
4. **Iterative Polishing & Optimization** - Reflect and optimize after generation, pursuing 90+ point quality
5. **Multi-Platform Output** - Generate post versions adapted to different platforms
**Expected dialogue rounds: 7-10 rounds**
- 3-4 rounds: Get direction and core viewpoints (technical documentation level)
- 5-7 rounds: Add cases, emotions, uniqueness (social media level)
- 7-10 rounds: Deep mining, repeated polishing (quality social media level)
## Core Mechanism: Progressive Questioning + Framework Internalization
### Three Core Principles
**1. Internalize Frameworks, Don't Expose Them**
Use thinking framework logic to design questions, but don't say "I'm using [Framework Name]":
```
Wrong: "I recommend using the PREP framework. Now for Point: What's your viewpoint?"
Correct: "What's the core viewpoint you want to express?"
Questions have framework thinking, but the dialogue is natural.
```
**2. Combine Multiple Choice + Open Questions**
```
Multiple Choice (AskUserQuestion) Quickly lock direction
Open Questions (direct dialogue) Deeply mine content
Multiple Choice = Skeleton | Open Questions = Flesh and blood
```
**3. Progressive Deepening, Dynamic Adjustment**
Each round of questions is based on the previous answer, naturally transitioning to the next dimension:
```
User: "todo is an underrated command"
↓
Follow-up: What does "underrated" specifically mean? (Concept deepening)
↓
User: "People don't know it's a conversation memory mechanism"
↓
Follow-up: What pain point does it solve? (Value inquiry)
↓
Follow-up: Any specific examples? (Case supplement)
```
---
### Questioning Flow (7-10 Rounds of Dialogue + Multi-Stage Search)
```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ User inputs idea │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ [Initial Search] Background information │
│ collection │
│ - Identify core concepts │
│ - Multi-angle search queries │
│ - Get background materials │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Rounds 1-2: Direction locking │
│ (mainly multiple choice) │
│ - Goal? Audience? Platform? │
│ - Quickly position article type │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Rounds 3-4: Core deep dive │
│ (open questions) │
│ - What's the core viewpoint? │
│ - What does "underrated" specifically mean? │
│ - What pain point does it solve? │
│ - Why do you think so? │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Rounds 5-6: Real cases │
│ (open questions, required) │
│ - When was the most recent time? │
│ - What feature? What specifically was said? │
│ - How did you feel at that moment? │
│ - Any comparison cases? (with vs without) │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Round 7: Emotional resonance │
│ (open questions, required) │
│ - Most frustrated/surprised moment? │
│ - Physical reaction? Slap thigh? Long sigh? │
│ - Turning point from "useless" to "amazing"? │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Round 8: Uniqueness │
│ (open questions) │
│ - Any undiscovered tips? │
│ - Any unique usage methods? │
│ - Any counter-intuitive understanding? │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ [Precision Search] Based on user's unique │
│ viewpoints │
│ - Extract unique insights/counter-intuitive │
│ viewpoints │
│ - Reverse search for supporting evidence │
│ - Multi-angle validation │
│ (industry/competitors/data) │
│ - Try different keywords if search fails │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Round 9: Structure confirmation │
│ (multiple choice) │
│ - Article structure? │
│ - Style preference? │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Round 10: Final touches │
│ (mixed) │
│ - Core golden sentence? │
│ - Call to action? │
│ - Anything else to add? │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Information completeness assessment │
│ (90+ point standard) │
│ Core viewpoint │
│ Real cases (required) │
│ Emotional resonance (required) │
│ Unique viewpoints (required) │
│ External validation (search results) │
│ → Complete, generate content │
│ → Incomplete, continue questioning │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ First draft generation │
│ (standard Markdown format) │
│ - Integrate all information │
│ - Use heading levels, bold, quote blocks, etc. │
│ - Generate structured content │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Reflection and optimization (optional) │
│ - What's not good enough? │
│ - What needs supplementing? │
│ - Iterate and optimize │
└────────────────┬────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Final output (standard Markdown format) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
```
**Note: Cases, emotions, and uniqueness are required and cRelated in Writing & Docs
jax-development
IncludedUse this skill when the user is writing, debugging, profiling, refactoring, reviewing, benchmarking, parallelising, exporting, or explaining JAX code, or when they mention JAX, jax.numpy, jit, grad, value_and_grad, vmap, scan, lax, random keys, pytrees, jax.Array, sharding, Mesh, PartitionSpec, NamedSharding, pmap, shard_map, Pallas, XLA, StableHLO, checkify, profiler, or the JAX repo. It helps turn NumPy or PyTorch-style code into pure functional JAX, fix tracer/control-flow/shape/PRNG bugs, remove recompiles and host-device syncs, choose transforms and sharding strategies, inspect jaxpr/lowering/IR, and benchmark compiled code correctly.
nature-article-writer
IncludedDrafts, rewrites, diagnostically critiques, and style-calibrates primary research manuscripts for Nature and Nature Portfolio journals. Use when the user wants a Nature-style title, summary paragraph or abstract, introduction, results, discussion, methods, figure legends, presubmission enquiry, cover letter, reviewer response, or when a scientific draft sounds generic, jargon-heavy, structurally weak, or AI-ish and needs precise, broad-reader-friendly prose without inventing data, analyses, or references. Best for primary research articles and letters rather than reviews or press releases unless explicitly adapting one.
deckrd
IncludedDocument-driven framework that derives requirements, specifications, implementation plans, and executable tasks from goals through structured AI dialogue. Use when user says "write requirements", "create spec", "plan implementation", "derive tasks", "structure this feature", "break down into tasks", or "document this module". Also use for reverse engineering existing code into docs (/deckrd rev). Do NOT use for direct code writing — use /deckrd-coder after tasks are generated. Do NOT use when the user only wants to run or fix existing code without planning.
clinical-decision-support
IncludedGenerate professional clinical decision support (CDS) documents for pharmaceutical and clinical research settings, including patient cohort analyses (biomarker-stratified with outcomes) and treatment recommendation reports (evidence-based guidelines with decision algorithms). Supports GRADE evidence grading, statistical analysis (hazard ratios, survival curves, waterfall plots), biomarker integration, and regulatory compliance. Outputs publication-ready LaTeX/PDF format optimized for drug development, clinical research, and evidence synthesis.
handling-sf-data
IncludedSalesforce data operations with 130-point scoring. Use this skill to create, update, delete, bulk import/export, generate test data, and clean up org records using sf CLI and anonymous Apex. TRIGGER when: user creates test data, performs bulk import/export, uses sf data CLI commands, needs data factory patterns for Apex tests, or needs to seed/clean records in a Salesforce org. DO NOT TRIGGER when: SOQL query writing only (use querying-soql), Apex test execution (use running-apex-tests), or metadata deployment (use deploying-metadata).
accelint-ac-to-playwright
IncludedConvert and validate acceptance criteria for Playwright test automation. Use when user asks to (1) review/evaluate/check if AC are ready for automation, (2) assess if AC can be converted as-is, (3) validate AC quality for Playwright, (4) turn AC into tests, (5) generate tests from acceptance criteria, (6) convert .md bullets or .feature Gherkin files to Playwright specs, (7) create test automation from requirements. Handles both bullet-style markdown and Gherkin syntax with JSON test plan generation and validation.