Xiaohongshu Law Content

小红书法律博主内容创作工作流 V2

Overview

This skill covers four content types for a Xiaohongshu legal education creator (6000+ followers, targeting recent graduates and workplace newcomers):

Load references/style-guide.md for the full visual style and copywriting specifications.

Workflow Decision Tree V2

User sends material
  │
  ├─ Contract/document → Type 1: 合同自查清单
  ├─ News/hot topic → Type 2: 热点法律解读
  ├─ Court case/judgment → Type 3: 案例拆解
  ├─ Single legal concept → Type 4: 知识卡片
  └─ No material, asking for ideas → Topic recommendation

Content Type 1: 合同自查清单 (Contract Self-Check)

The original workflow. Follow the existing 5-step pipeline:

Step 1: Contract Analysis

Identify contract type, key clauses, legal pitfalls. Verify against current laws.

Step 2: Script Generation

Output the standard page-by-page script:

• Title options (3-5)
• Cover design (background + large title + red annotation hook)
• Page 2: Full checklist overview
• Pages 3-N: One checkpoint per page (big title + 3-6 red annotations + supplementary text)
• Final page: Signing reminders
• Post copy: Hook + Body (checklist) + CTA (multiple choice comment prompt) + Disclaimer
• Pinned comment: Privacy warning + keyword guide
• Hashtags: 3-5 (niche + audience + format)

Step 3: Image Annotation

For each contract screenshot, identify annotation targets and output position + red annotation text.

Step 4: Copywriting Refinement

Polish the post text. Produce two versions: full + compressed (under 300 chars).

Step 5: Complete Package

Assemble: titles, cover, scripts, copy (2 versions), pinned comment, hashtags, annotation guide.

Content Type 2: 热点法律解读 (Hot Topic Analysis)

When the user provides a news story or current event with legal implications:

Output Structure

标题备选：(3 options, punchy + curiosity-driven)

正文：
[切入段]
用具体场景切入，不要"近日，某公司..."
✅ "今天朋友圈刷屏的裁员邮件，你应该点开看看附件"

[法条速读段]
2-3个关键法条，用人话翻译，不用原文
格式："根据规定，公司需要...（《劳动合同法》第X条）"
每段落不超过3行

[反常识段]
1-2个"你以为的 vs 实际上"对比
格式："很多人觉得... 但实际上..."

[行动建议段]
2-3条可操作的下一步
格式："如果你也遇到，现在就可以做的3件事：1. 保存... 2. 确认... 3. 联系..."

评论区引导：(选择题式，利用情绪勾起互动)
Tag推荐：事件标签 + 法律赛道标签 + 情绪标签

Rules for Hot Topic Analysis:

• NEVER use fear-mongering: no "太可怕了" "震惊" "千万别"
• ALWAYS cite specific legal provisions (verified, current)
• ALWAYS include actionable next steps
• DO NOT speculate on ongoing cases — stick to established legal principles
• Use the event as a hook, but the value is the legal education

Comment Strategy:

Hot topics naturally generate argument. Design the pinned comment to steer toward constructive engagement:

• Option-based Q&A: "你觉得公司这样做合法吗？A.合法 B.不合法 C.看情况，评论区说理由"
• Or: "你遇到过类似情况吗？最后怎么解决的？"

Content Type 3: 案例拆解 (Case Breakdown)

When the user provides a court judgment or wants to break down a real legal case:

Output Structure

标题备选：(storytelling style, "XX因XX起诉XX，法院判了")

[故事段]
200字以内讲清案件经过
要素：谁、对谁、做了什么、为什么、结果
用小说笔法但不说假："2023年3月，张三收到了公司的解除通知..."

[争议焦点段]
列出1-2个核心法律问题
格式：❓ 问题：公司能不能因为员工发朋友圈就开除？

[法院怎么说段]
用人话翻译裁判要点
格式：⚖️ 法院认为：...
关键引用原文但必须附人话翻译

[给你的启示段]
3条实用takeaway
格式：📌 这个案子告诉你：1. ... 2. ... 3. ...

[评论区引导]
Tag推荐

Rules for Case Breakdown:

• MUST anonymize all parties (use "张三" "某公司" "某科技企业")
• MUST include case source (court, year, case number if available)
• MUST translate legal jargon into plain language
• DO NOT second-guess the court's ruling — present the facts and reasoning
• Focus on what the reader can learn, not on "how bad the system is"

Content Type 4: 知识卡片 (Knowledge Card)

When the user wants a single, focused legal concept explained in minimal format:

Output Structure

封面大字标题：(1 sentence, 15-20 chars, curiosity-driven)
例："试用期=廉价期？违法"

正文：(3-5 bullet points, 1 sentence each)
格式：
· 试用期工资不能低于转正后80%
· 同一家公司只能约定一次试用期
· 试用期包含在劳动合同期限内
· 试用期最长6个月（3年以上合同）

红字批注：(1 sentence hook at bottom)
例："HR说试用期不交社保？录音，然后举报"

评论区引导：(simple multiple choice)
Tag推荐

Rules for Knowledge Cards:

• ONE concept per card — do not try to cover multiple topics
• Maximum 5 bullet points
• Every fact must have a legal basis (cite in hidden notes, not in the visual)
• Design for screenshots — assume it will be screenshot and shared
• Lead with the most counter-intuitive fact

🛡️ Mandatory Legal Verification (V2.1 — ALWAYS EXECUTE)

CRITICAL: This step is MANDATORY for ALL content types. Never skip it.

After generating any legal content, before final output, run a full verification pass:

Process

Step A: Extract All Legal Claims

List every factual legal claim in the generated content. For each claim, identify:

• The specific legal assertion (e.g., "试用期最长6个月")
• The relevant law/regulation (e.g., 《劳动合同法》第十九条)
• Whether a specific number, deadline, or condition is stated

Step B: Verify Each Claim via Web Search

For every legal claim, use WebSearch to find the latest official source:

• Search query format: "[法律名称] [具体条款] [关键词] 最新"
• Example: "劳动合同法 第十九条 试用期 最新规定"
• Check for: amendments, new interpretations, judicial guidelines, local variations

Step C: Flag and Correct

For each claim:

• ✅ CONFIRMED: Mark as verified with source citation
• ⚠️ NEEDS PRECISION: State what's imprecise and provide the exact legal language
• ❌ INCORRECT: Immediately correct and flag prominently
• 📍 LOCAL VARIATION: Note if this varies by province/city

Step D: Output the Verification Page

CRITICAL: The verification page MUST be a distinctly separate section from the creative content. Use a clear visual separator. Do NOT mix verification info into the creative output.

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║              ⚖️ 法条核查页 — 内部参考                    ║
║         本页不对外发布，仅供内容准确性验证                    ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝

Format for each verified claim:

### 主张 {序号}

📝 **内容中的写法：**
> [原文中的完整句子]

📜 **法律依据：**
- 法律名称：《[全称]》
- 条款：第 X 条
- 原文：
> [法条原文，保持格式]

🔍 **核查结果：** ✅ 准确 / ⚠️ 需精确化 / ❌ 有误

💡 **核查说明：**
[一句话解释为什么这个主张正确或需要调整。如需要修正，列出改前改后对比]

---

Full verification page template:

╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║              ⚖️ 法条核查页 — 内部参考                    ║
║         本页不对外发布，仅供内容准确性验证                    ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝

> 生成时间：[datetime]
> 内容类型：[合同自查/热点解读/案例拆解/知识卡片]
> 核查条款数：N 条

### 主张 1

📝 **内容中的写法：**
> [原文句子]

📜 **法律依据：**
- 法律名称：《[法律全称]》
- 条款：第 X 条
- 原文：
> [法条原文]

🔍 **核查结果：** ✅ 准确

💡 **核查说明：**[一句话]

---

### 主张 2

📝 **内容中的写法：**
> [原文句子]

📜 **法律依据：**
- 法律名称：《[法律全称]》
- 条款：第 X 条第 Y 款
- 原文：
> [法条原文]

🔍 **核查结果：** ⚠️ 需精确化

💡 **核查说明：**
- 改前：[原文]
- 改后：[修正版]

---

[重复所有主张...]

---

## 📊 核查汇总

| 结果 | 数量 |
|:---:|:---:|
| ✅ 准确 | X |
| ⚠️ 需精确化 | X |
| ❌ 有误 | X |
| **合计** | **N** |

The creative content and the verification page MUST be separated by this marker:

════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
📱 以上为小红书发布内容  |  ⚖️ 以下为法条核查页（内部参考，不发布）
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Integrated De-AI Workflow (V2)

After generating ANY copy (all four content types), perform a mandatory de-AI check:

Process:

1. Generate the full copy
2. Self-review against the de-AI checklist:
   • Scan for AI patterns: "在当今...的时代" "此外" "然而" "本质上"
   • Check for over-structured paragraphs (all same length, all same pattern)
   • Check for "textbook tone" — too formal, too complete, too balanced
   • Check emotional warmth — is there a real person behind this?
3. Apply fixes:
   • Break parallel structures
   • Shorten some sentences, lengthen others
   • Add one "messy" element: a digression, a self-deprecating note, a colloquial interjection
   • Replace hedging language with direct statements
   • Make one sentence a standalone paragraph for weight
4. Output the de-AI'ed version alongside the original (so the user can compare)

Quick De-AI Rules (Xiaohongshu-Specific):

• NO colon-heavy structured lists in the hook paragraph
• NO "接下来我们来聊聊..." (no meta-commentary)
• NO "综上所述" or "总而言之" endings
• YES to ending on a specific, actionable note
• YES to first-person when appropriate ("我整理这份清单的时候发现...")
• YES to colloquial phrasing ("说实话" "说白了" "你猜怎么着")

Topic Recommendation Mode

When the user asks for topic ideas without providing material:

1. Scan current legal news, trending topics, seasonal events
2. Score candidates by: audience reach, emotional driver, collection value, comment potential
3. Output 3-5 topics ranked, with rationale and suggested content type
4. For each topic, provide the "hook sentence" that would open the post

General Principles (All Content Types)

Legal Boundaries (ABSOLUTE):

• Include disclaimer: "本篇只做通用普法参考，具体纠纷请结合完整材料判断"
• Remind users to redact personal info
• NEVER offer case-specific legal advice
• NEVER use absolute language ("一定赢""肯定""包解决")
• NEVER create antagonism between parties

Writing Voice:

• Use second-person "你" for direct engagement
• Imperative verbs for instructions ("要看" "别签" "问清楚")
• Concrete scenarios over abstract principles
• Compact and punchy — Xiaohongshu is mobile-first reading

Final Output Format (All Content Types)

Every output MUST follow this two-section structure:

[Section 1: 小红书发布内容]
- 标题备选
- 正文/图文脚本
- 评论区引导
- 置顶评论
- Tag

════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
📱 以上为小红书发布内容  |  ⚖️ 以下为法条核查页（内部参考，不发布）
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

[Section 2: 法条核查页]
- 逐条主张 vs 法条原文对照
- 核查结果与修正
- 核查汇总