Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHubEnglish overview

writing-shape

Turn notes, fragments, or transcripts into an article through a paragraph-by-paragraph discussion. Compare opening options, establish what readers need to know, and save agreed sections in a separate document while preserving the original material.

OriginalShow the original description

Writing, exploit: shape raw material into an article, paragraph by paragraph.

AI rating100/ 100See how to install

Good for

  • Turning scattered notes into an article
  • Building a readable article from a transcript
  • Comparing opening angles before drafting
  • Checking the order and purpose of each paragraph

Overview

What it does

writing-shape helps you build an article from notes, fragments, or transcripts through discussion. It reads all the material first, establishes what readers already know, and offers two or three openings with different angles. Once you choose an opening, it works through the explanation one paragraph at a time and appends each agreed section to the article file. It also discusses whether the content calls for prose, a list, a table, a quotation, or another format.

When it helps

Use it when you have collected material but have not settled on the article's argument or the order of explanation. It checks each paragraph's purpose and connection to the others, introducing unfamiliar concepts before relying on them. If the material lacks a needed example, it identifies the gap and discusses whether you should supply one or omit that part.

Example requests

  • “Suggest three openings from these notes, then build the article one paragraph at a time.”
  • “Turn this transcript into an article ordered for someone reading about the topic for the first time.”

Notes

Provide the material as a Markdown file. The article is saved separately, and the source file is not edited. Gathering information beyond the supplied material, publishing, and unrequested platform-specific formatting are outside its scope. You decide when the article is finished.

This overview was written by AI (OpenAI Codex) from the public SKILL.md. Check the original below for the exact behavior.

Objective evaluation

AI rated this skill on four points using only the contents of its SKILL.md. Stars and popularity are not taken into account.

Clear instructionsIs it clear when to use it and what it does?
AGoodIt explicitly describes creating a separate article from Markdown material through discussion and lists excluded work.
Concrete stepsAre steps, inputs, outputs, and examples spelled out?
AGoodThe workflow specifies reading all material, proposing openings, agreeing on each paragraph, and saving it.
SafetyAre sending data, deleting files, and running commands disclosed?
AGoodIt preserves source material, rereads the article before writing, and limits revisions to the requested paragraph.
Easy setupDoes it need few tools or API keys, and are they documented?
AGoodInput is a Markdown file; no additional tools or API keys are specified.

The total counts each point as A = 25, B = 15, C = 5. Rated by AI (OpenAI Codex) as of Oct 19, 2026. Treat it as a guide and read the original before installing.

Disagree? Request a re-evaluation

Tell us which point is wrong and why. No login needed. We will check it against the SKILL.md, redo the evaluation, and show the result here.

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md5.8 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml144 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

<what-to-do>

The user has passed (or will pass) a markdown file of raw material. Treat it as the input pile: anything from a tidy list of fragments to a wall of unstructured prose to a transcript. The format does not matter. Read it end-to-end before doing anything else.

Then run a shaping session that produces a separate article document. This is exploit: the exploring is done, the pile is fixed: commit to a structure and mine the pile to fill it. Do not edit the raw material file: it is read-only to this skill.

If the user did not say where to save the article, ask once and remember the path.

</what-to-do> <supporting-info>

The loop

  1. Read the pile. Read the input file in full. Form a sense of what's in it.
  2. Establish the prerequisites. Settle with the user what the reader knows walking in: the concepts that are grounded from the start. Everything else must be grounded by a block before a later block can lean on it. See Grounding.
  3. Draft 2–3 candidate openings. Each opening should imply a different thesis or angle for the article. Show all of them. Force the user to pick or compose a hybrid. The chosen opening defines what the rest of the article must do.
  4. Grow paragraph by paragraph. After the opening lands, ask "given this opening, what does the reader need to hear next?" Pull material from the pile to answer. The next block may only lean on grounded concepts, and grounds new ones as it lands. Argue about the form the next block takes: a paragraph, a list, a table, a callout, a quote, a code block. Each format choice should be deliberate and defensible.
  5. Append to the article file as you go. Don't batch. Write each agreed paragraph or block immediately so the user can see the article taking shape.
  6. Loop step 4 until the article is done. The user decides when it's done.

Grounding

Every concept has to be grounded before a block can lean on it: the reader either walked in knowing it or met it in an earlier block. A block that reaches for an ungrounded concept loses the reader. The unit is the concept, not the word for it: a block can lean on an idea the reader lacks even with no jargon in sight. Where a concept has a name (a term), grounding it means landing the idea and the term together.

A concept gets grounded one of two ways:

  • Prerequisite: grounded before the opening. The reader brings it. Fixed at the start.
  • Introduced: a block establishes it, and from then on it's grounded for the rest of the article.

Keep a running list of what's grounded. When you ask "what does the reader need to hear next?", an ungrounded concept the next move needs is itself the answer: ground it first (here or in an earlier block) or you can't make the move. This is the gap-naming of Pulling from the pile one level up: there the pile is missing material; here the article is missing a foundation.

The lever is what you make a prerequisite versus what you ground inside the article. Demand too much up front and you shut readers out; ground too much inside and the opening drowns in definitions. Settle it with the user when you establish prerequisites.

Conversational feel

This is a grilling session inverted. In ideation, the question was "what are you actually noticing?" Here it's "what is this article actually arguing, and in what order does the reader need to hear it?" Push back. Refuse to let weak transitions slide. If a paragraph doesn't earn its place, cut it.

Specific moves to keep using:

  • "What does this paragraph do for the reader that the previous one didn't?"
  • "If I cut this, what breaks?"
  • "Is this prose, or should it be a list? Why prose?"
  • "This sentence is doing two jobs: split it or pick one."
  • "The opening promised X. We've drifted to Y. Either re-thread it or change the opening."

Pulling from the pile

Treat the raw material as a quarry, not a script. Pull a fragment, rework it to fit the surrounding paragraph, and place it. A fragment may be split across multiple paragraphs, merged with another, or paraphrased. The pile's job is to be mined; the article's job is to read as one voice.

If the pile lacks something the article needs, name the gap explicitly: "We need an example here and the pile doesn't have one. Give me one now or we cut this section."

Format arguments to actually have

When choosing how to render a block, weigh these tradeoffs out loud with the user, not silently:

  • Prose vs. list. Prose carries argument; lists carry parallel items. If items aren't truly parallel, prose is better. If they are, a list is faster to scan.
  • Inline vs. callout. Tips, warnings, and asides go in callouts (> [!TIP], > [!NOTE]), but only if they'd genuinely derail the main argument inline. Otherwise leave them inline.
  • Table vs. repeated structure. If the same shape repeats 3+ times with the same fields, a table. Otherwise prose with bold leads.
  • Quote vs. paraphrase. Quote when the original wording is the point. Paraphrase when only the idea matters.
  • Code block vs. inline code. Multi-line, runnable, or illustrative → block. Single token or identifier → inline.

Writing rhythm

Append to the article file as each block is agreed. Re-read the file from disk before every write: the user may have edited between turns. Never overwrite blindly. If the user wants a paragraph rewritten, edit that specific paragraph in place; leave the rest alone.

Out of scope

  • Mining for new fragments that aren't in the pile (handle gaps as in "Pulling from the pile").
  • Editing the raw material file.
  • Publishing, formatting for a specific platform, or adding frontmatter the user didn't ask for.
</supporting-info>

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

ask-matt

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Choose which related skill to use and in what order for planning, building, debugging, or maintaining software. It explains routes through the available workflows and helps select the next step based on your situation and project size.

  • Choosing a workflow from idea to implementation
  • Finding the right starting point for bug investigation
  • Planning a build that spans multiple sessions
mattpocock/skills297.6KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

chief-of-staff

FreeSummaryAI rating 60

Coordinate subagents, separate agents assigned tasks, to pursue a long-running goal in one session. Maintain dialogue with the user while improving working conditions, shared rules, and access to information needed for future tasks.

  • Coordinating agents around a long-term goal
  • Continuing user dialogue during background work
  • Improving shared rules and working conditions
mattpocock/skills297.6KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

claude-handoff

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Summarize an ongoing conversation and launch a fresh background agent to continue the work. The handoff includes the next focus, references to existing documents, and suggested skills, with sensitive information removed.

  • Continue ongoing work with a fresh agent
  • Hand off work with a specific next focus
  • Organize document references for the next session
mattpocock/skills297.6KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

code-review

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Review code changes from a chosen Git reference against two separate criteria: documented coding standards and the original requirements. Independent reviewers check each criterion, then present findings separately so convention problems and requirement gaps remain visible.

  • Reviewing changes on a branch or pull request
  • Checking changes since a chosen commit or tag
  • Checking compliance with documented coding standards
mattpocock/skills297.6KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

codebase-design

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Design modules that offer substantial behavior through a small interface, the rules callers must understand. Use shared design terms to simplify usage, contain complexity, choose where implementations can vary, and make behavior easier to test.

  • Simplifying a module's interface
  • Bringing scattered complexity into one module
  • Choosing where implementations can be swapped
mattpocock/skills297.6KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

diagnosing-bugs

FreeSummaryAI rating 80

Investigate difficult bugs and performance slowdowns by building a repeatable test or script that detects the exact symptom. Reduce the failing case, compare possible causes, and verify the fix with checks that catch the bug if it returns.

  • Investigating an error that is hard to reproduce
  • Finding the cause of a performance slowdown
  • Testing an intermittent failure repeatedly
mattpocock/skills297.6KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

See all skills by mattpocock

Report a problem with this skill