Article Writing

Article Writing

Write long-form content that sounds like a real person or brand, not generic AI output. Every piece should be concrete, earned, and platform-appropriate.

Workflow

When this skill activates:

1. Clarify before writing — identify audience, purpose, platform, and approximate length. One question if anything is ambiguous; don't stall.
2. Capture the voice if a specific voice is required — collect examples, extract characteristics, and produce a Voice Profile (see below) before drafting.
3. Process raw material if the user provides notes, transcripts, or research — extract the signal, identify the argument, then draft.
4. Build a skeletal outline with one clear purpose per section. Show it and get a quick confirm if the piece is substantial (>800 words).
5. Draft — start each section with concrete evidence. Expand only where the next sentence earns its place.
6. Run the quality gate before delivering. Cut what fails it.
7. Offer a revision pass — one targeted question after delivery to catch misses.

Core Rules

These apply to every piece regardless of format or voice:

1. Lead with the concrete thing — example, output, number, anecdote, screenshot description, or code block. Explain after, not before.
2. Short sentences are a default — pad only for deliberate rhythm.
3. Use specific numbers when available and sourced. "37%" beats "most".
4. Never invent facts — no biographical claims, company metrics, customer evidence, or quotes unless provided.
5. Every section must add new information — if it only restates what came before, cut it.
6. Earn the opinion — any claim stronger than neutral must be supported by evidence in the same paragraph.

Voice Capture

What to Collect

Before writing in a specific voice, ask for one or more of:

• published articles or blog posts
• newsletter issues
• X / LinkedIn posts
• internal memos or docs
• a short style guide or "write like X" brief

Three to five examples are sufficient. More is not better — look for patterns, not every quirk.

Voice Profile Template

After reviewing examples, produce and share a Voice Profile. This documents the extracted voice and prevents drift across turns:

VOICE PROFILE: [Person / Brand Name]

Sentence length:   [short / medium / long / mixed — with pattern if mixed]
Register:          [formal / conversational / sharp / academic / warm]
First person:      [heavy / light / avoided]
Humor:             [none / dry / self-deprecating / frequent]
Opinion tolerance: [neutral / willing to argue / contrarian by default]

Signature patterns:
- [specific device — e.g., "opens with a counterintuitive claim"]
- [e.g., "uses em dashes instead of parentheses"]
- [e.g., "rhetorical questions to end sections"]
- [e.g., "short fragments for emphasis"]

Formatting habits:
- Headers:  [yes/no/minimal]
- Bullets:  [frequent / sparingly / avoided]
- Bold:     [for key terms / for emphasis / avoided]
- Pull quotes or callouts: [yes/no]

Avoid:
- [things this voice never does — e.g., "no hedging language"]
- [e.g., "never opens with a question"]

Share the Voice Profile with the user before drafting. Confirm or adjust. Then hold to it.

Default voice (when no examples are provided): direct, operator-style — concrete, practical, low on hype, willing to state an opinion plainly.

Working with Raw Material

When the user provides notes, transcripts, bullet points, or research:

1. Find the argument — what is the single thing this piece should leave the reader believing or able to do? State it explicitly before drafting.
2. Strip scaffolding — remove meta-commentary ("here I want to talk about..."), repeated points, and anything that was a thinking-out-loud note rather than a content decision.
3. Sequence by importance, not by how the material arrived — the order notes were taken in is rarely the order they should be read.
4. Flag gaps — identify where the raw material is thin and the piece needs either more research or a scoped-down claim.
5. Preserve the raw specifics — real names, real numbers, real quotes from the material are more valuable than synthesized generalities.

Structure by Content Type

Technical Guides and Tutorials

• Open with what the reader gets at the end — the concrete output, not the topic
• Use code, terminal output, or screenshots in every major section
• Each step should produce something observable
• Close with concrete takeaways and the most common failure modes
• Length: 800–2500 words depending on complexity; err toward shorter if the task is well-scoped

Essays and Opinion Pieces

• Open with tension, contradiction, or a sharp observation — not background
• One argument thread per section; sidebars go in parentheses or footnotes
• The opinion must be stated explicitly, not implied — readers should be able to quote it
• Use examples that earn the opinion, not examples that just illustrate it
• Close by raising the stakes, not summarizing
• Length: 600–1800 words; longer only if the argument genuinely needs the space

Newsletter Issues

• First screen (above the fold) must reward opening — lead with the most interesting thing
• Mix insight with update; avoid diary filler
• Clear section labels for skim navigation
• Each section should stand alone if forwarded or quoted
• Length: 300–900 words for a single-topic issue; multi-section newsletters can be longer with clear navigation

LinkedIn Posts

• First line must work as a hook with the rest collapsed — most readers never expand
• No "In this post I will tell you about..." — get to the point in line 1
• Short paragraphs; one idea per paragraph; single-line breaks create visual rhythm
• Use a hook → insight → evidence → implication structure
• End with a specific observation, not "what do you think?"
• Length: 150–400 words for most posts; 400–700 for long-form LinkedIn articles

Launch Posts and Announcements

• Lead with what changed or what the reader can now do — not the company story
• Specific > vague: "ships today" not "coming soon", "saves 3 hours/week" not "saves time"
• One primary call to action; avoid four different links
• Length: 200–500 words

Headlines and Titles

The headline is the highest-leverage line in the piece. Write 3–5 options for every piece and select the best:

Patterns that perform:

• Specific number: "7 Things We Learned Rebuilding Our Auth System"
• Direct promise: "How to Cut Your Docker Build Time by 60%"
• Counterintuitive claim: "Why We Stopped Using Microservices"
• Named problem: "The Hidden Cost of Premature Abstraction"
• Before/after: "From 12-Hour Deploys to 40 Minutes"

Avoid:

• Questions (weak, often hedging the actual claim)
• "The Ultimate Guide to..." (overused, unearned)
• Titles that describe the article's topic without stating its argument
• Anything that would work equally well for 20 other articles

Always confirm the title is either: a specific claim, a specific promise, or a specific question the reader urgently wants answered.

Platform Formatting

SEO (When Relevant)

For blog posts and guides where search visibility matters:

1. Primary keyword — the phrase readers would search to find this article. State it by the end of the first paragraph, naturally.
2. Secondary keywords — 2–3 related phrases; use in H2s and body naturally, not stuffed.
3. Meta description — one sentence (150–160 characters), includes primary keyword, describes what the reader gets.
4. Title tag — primary keyword near the front if possible without sounding unnatural.
5. Internal links — note where other content on the same site should be linked.

SEO should shape word choice, not distort it. A sentence rewritten for a keyword that no longer reads well is a loss.

Banned Patterns

Cut and rewrite any of these without comment:

Generic openers

• "In today's rapidly evolving landscape..."
• "As [topic] continues to grow..."
• "Have you ever wondered..."
• "I'm excited to share..."

Filler transitions

• "Moreover", "Furthermore", "Additionally", "It is worth noting that"
• "In conclusion", "To summarize", "As we've seen"

Hype language

• "game-changer", "revolutionary", "cutting-edge", "best-in-class"
• "seamless", "robust", "holistic", "synergy", "leverage" (as a verb)
• "I believe" / "I think" when followed by a hedge, not an actual belief

Safety blanket hedging

• "You might want to consider..."
• "It could be argued that..."
• "There are many factors to consider..."

Empty credentialism

• Claiming expertise not backed by provided context
• "As a leader in X" without evidence
• Quotes attributed to unnamed "experts" or "studies"

Structural tells

• Three-word section headings that restate the paragraph below them
• Numbered lists where the numbers don't matter
• Bullets that are just the same sentence with commas removed

Quality Gate

Run these before delivering. Fail means rewrite, not minor edit:

• Opening: Does the first sentence earn the second? Cut anything that reads like a warmup.
• Headline: Is it a specific claim, promise, or urgent question — not a topic description?
• Voice match: Read the first paragraph aloud against the Voice Profile. Does it match? If not, identify which rule it breaks.
• Evidence: Every opinion or claim stronger than neutral — is it backed in the same paragraph?
• Filler audit: Ctrl+F for "moreover", "furthermore", "it's worth noting", "game-changer", "seamless". If found, rewrite.
• Invented facts: Any metric, quote, or biographical claim — was it in the provided material? If not, remove it.
• Length: Is the word count appropriate for the platform and scope? Cut aggressively if over.
• Platform format: Headers, line breaks, code blocks — correct for the destination?
• Final line: Does it close with weight, or just trail off? The last sentence should land.