writing-stickiness

What this skill does

# Writing Stickiness Enhancement

## Table of Contents

- [Core Principles](#core-principles)
- [Workflow](#workflow)
- [SUCCESs Framework Overview](#success-framework-overview)
- [Guardrails](#guardrails)
- [Quick Reference](#quick-reference)

**Related skills:** Use `writing-structure-planner` for planning structure, `writing-revision` for prose revision, `writing-pre-publish-checklist` for final quality checks.

## Core Principles

1. **Six dimensions of stickiness**: Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, Stories
2. **Diagnose before treating**: Score current stickiness first, then improve weakest areas
3. **Not all principles are equal**: Some matter more for certain contexts - prioritize accordingly
4. **Concrete beats abstract**: Brains think in images, not abstractions
5. **Individuals beat statistics**: One person's story moves people more than millions in data

## Workflow

Copy this checklist and track your progress:

```
Stickiness Enhancement:
- [ ] Step 1: Analyze against SUCCESs framework
- [ ] Step 2: Improve weak principles
- [ ] Step 3: Score and refine
```

**Before starting:** Review [resources/success-model.md](resources/success-model.md) for the complete SUCCESs framework with all 6 principles, stickiness scorecard, and before/after examples.

Analyze the entire document first and output findings to an analysis file in the current directory, then read that file to make improvements. This ensures complete coverage.

**Step 1: Analyze against SUCCESs framework**

Step 1.1: Read entire draft. Create analysis file `writer-stickiness-analysis.md` assessing the document against all 6 SUCCESs principles:

- **Simple** (0-3): Identify core message in 12 words or fewer. List competing messages. Rate clarity and focus.
- **Unexpected** (0-3): Identify surprise elements or curiosity gaps. Note where expectations could be violated. Rate attention-getting power.
- **Concrete** (0-3): List visualizable details. Identify abstract sections needing examples. Rate sensory specificity.
- **Credible** (0-3): Identify credibility sources (statistics, testability, authority, vivid details). Note unsupported claims. Rate believability.
- **Emotional** (0-3): Identify emotional connections and personal benefits. Note where motivation could be strengthened. Rate "care factor."
- **Stories** (0-3): Identify story or human elements. Note opportunities to add narrative. Rate mental simulation potential.

Step 1.2: Calculate total current stickiness score out of 18. Present findings to user.

See each principle's section in [resources/success-model.md](resources/success-model.md) for detailed scoring guidance.

**Step 2: Improve weak principles**

Step 2.1: Read analysis file. Identify the 2-3 weakest principles (scored 0-1).

Step 2.2: Work through entire draft making targeted improvements for each weak principle:
- **Simple**: Refine core message to 12 words or fewer. Strip competing ideas.
- **Unexpected**: Add surprise or curiosity gaps. Violate reader expectations.
- **Concrete**: Add visualizable details and specific examples. Replace abstractions.
- **Credible**: Add statistics (human-scale), testability ("try it yourself"), authority, or vivid details.
- **Emotional**: Strengthen personal benefits and emotional connections. Focus on individuals, not masses.
- **Stories**: Add narrative or human elements. Use challenge, connection, or creativity plots.

Step 2.3: Present improved version to user with changes highlighted.

See [resources/success-model.md](resources/success-model.md) for specific techniques and examples for each principle.

**Step 3: Score and refine**

Step 3.1: Score the revised message using the [Stickiness Scorecard](resources/success-model.md#stickiness-scorecard).

Step 3.2: Aim for 12+/18 for good stickiness, 15+/18 for excellent. If score is below 12, identify the weakest 2 principles and do another improvement pass focusing on those.

Step 3.3: Present final scored version with before/after comparison.

See [resources/success-model.md - Complete Example](resources/success-model.md#complete-example) for transformation patterns.

Validate using [resources/evaluators/rubric_stickiness.json](resources/evaluators/rubric_stickiness.json). **Minimum standard**: Average score >= 3.5.

## SUCCESs Framework Overview

| Principle | Key Question | Technique |
|-----------|-------------|-----------|
| **S**imple | What's the ONE core idea? | Commander's intent in 12 words |
| **U**nexpected | What will surprise readers? | Schema violation + curiosity gaps |
| **C**oncrete | Can readers visualize it? | Sensory details, specific examples |
| **C**redible | Why should readers believe it? | Human-scale stats, testability |
| **E**motional | Why should readers care? | Individual focus, identity appeal |
| **S**tories | Can readers simulate the experience? | Challenge/connection/creativity plots |

**Scoring:** Each principle rated 0-3. Total out of 18. Target 12+ for good, 15+ for excellent.

## Guardrails

**Requirements:**

1. **Score before improving**: Always analyze and score the current state before making changes
2. **Target weakest first**: Focus improvements on the lowest-scoring principles
3. **Preserve accuracy**: Never sacrifice truthfulness for stickiness - credibility matters
4. **Context-appropriate**: Not every piece needs maximum stickiness - match to purpose
5. **Re-score after improving**: Always score the revised version to measure improvement

**Common pitfalls:**
- Improving already-strong principles while ignoring weak ones
- Adding surprise that's random rather than relevant to the core message
- Using statistics that are too large to grasp (billions, trillions)
- Focusing on masses instead of individuals for emotional appeal
- Telling instead of showing when adding stories

## Quick Reference

**Key resources:**
- **[resources/success-model.md](resources/success-model.md)**: Complete SUCCESs framework, all 6 principles, scorecard, examples
- **[resources/evaluators/rubric_stickiness.json](resources/evaluators/rubric_stickiness.json)**: Quality scoring criteria

**Inputs required:**
- Draft text or message to enhance
- Target audience (if known)
- Context (presentation, article, email, pitch, etc.)

**Outputs produced:**
- Stickiness analysis with per-principle scores
- Improved version targeting weak principles
- Before/after comparison with score improvement