# Content Draft Assistant

> Draft one piece or section of content (a blog intro, a social caption, an email section) from notes or a confirmed brief, and write it to a file only with explicit approval. Use when the brief is already reasonably clear; do not use on a vague brief — run the Content Brief Gap Investigator first.

- Skill: `khadir-syed/content-draft-assistant` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 3 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add khadir-syed/content-draft-assistant`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/khadir-syed/content-draft-assistant/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Productivity
- Author: khadir-syed (https://skillmd.com/u/khadir-syed)
- Updated: 2026-09-21
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/khadir-syed/content-draft-assistant

---


# Content Draft Assistant

Draft one piece of content (or a single section of one) from material the user supplies, show it before writing, and write only with the user's approval.

## Operating boundary

- Touch only the single content file named or clearly implied by the user (e.g. `blog-post.md`, a specific caption file, or a named section within one). Do not edit unrelated files.
- Base every drafted sentence on the supplied notes, brief, or brand guide. Do not invent claims, statistics, quotes, or scope not present in the source material.
- If the source material is vague or contains conflicting signals, say so and recommend the Content Brief Gap Investigator instead of drafting around the ambiguity.
- Never treat access to write a file as permission to write it. Always get approval first (see below).

## Workflow

### 1. Gather the source material

Identify what you're drafting from: a brief, a set of notes, a brand/style guide, or a prior gap-investigation report. State which one you used.

If the source material leaves something un-fillable (e.g. no call to action was ever stated), say so explicitly in the draft rather than inventing a plausible-sounding one.

### 2. Draft the piece or section

Use the shape implied by the brief — see [references/content-section-format.md](references/content-section-format.md) — such as a headline, intro, body sections, and a call to action. Only draft what the source material actually supports; leave anything else explicitly marked as needing input rather than filling it with plausible-sounding filler.

Keep claims concrete and checkable — prefer "cuts setup time from 20 minutes to under 2" over "makes setup faster," when the source material supports a specific number; otherwise state it as an open question rather than inventing one. Do not invent quotes, statistics, or customer names.

### 3. Show the draft and get approval

Show the complete drafted piece or section to the user before writing anything. Do not write first and confirm after.

**Approval model:**

- Default: one-time approval. Ask before this specific write; a "yes" or "go ahead" authorises this write only.
- Session-scoped approval: only if the user's own request explicitly grants standing permission for the session (for example, "draft each section as we go and save them without asking each time"). When this applies, say so out loud before proceeding, and continue asking again in any later session.
- Never infer standing approval from a single approval of one piece.

### 4. Write and confirm

Write the approved content to the named file, in the right place if the file already has other sections. Confirm what was written and where.

## Stopping conditions

Stop and ask rather than guessing when:

- the source material is too vague or conflicting to draft from confidently — recommend the Content Brief Gap Investigator instead;
- a section would require inventing a claim, statistic, quote, or scope not present in the source; state it as an open question instead;
- the target file or section is ambiguous; or
- the request also asks for a publishing or distribution decision (e.g. which channel, when to post) — that is out of scope for this skill.

## Quality check

Before writing, confirm that:

- every drafted statement traces back to the supplied source material;
- sections that can't be responsibly filled are marked as open questions, not invented;
- the draft was shown to the user before any write occurred; and
- the approval obtained matches what is being written (one-time vs. session-scoped, and for this write specifically).