본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

snowball-content

Use when turning a single topic into a full content plan with multiple angles, formats, and a publishing calendar. Triggers on "content plan", "content calendar", "snowball method", "turn one topic into many posts", "content multiplication", "30 days of content", "content from one idea".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(6)

  • SKILL.md5.4 KB
  • simmer/iteration-0-candidate.md5.1 KB
  • simmer/iteration-1-candidate.md5.7 KB
  • simmer/iteration-2-candidate.md5.3 KB
  • simmer/iteration-3-candidate.md5.4 KB
  • simmer/trajectory.md1.1 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

The Snowball Method

Turn 1 topic into 40+ content pieces across platforms using a 4-prompt sequential pipeline.

The Pipeline

This is a sequential 4-prompt process. Each prompt builds on the previous output. Do NOT skip steps or combine them.

digraph snowball {
  rankdir=TB;
  core [label="Prompt 1: THE CORE\nAsk clarifying questions FIRST\nthen define the core problem"];
  angles [label="Prompt 2: ANGLES & HEADLINES\n7 unexpected angles from core\neach with hooks, facts, controversy"];
  branches [label="Prompt 3: BRANCHES\n3 subtopics per angle\n3 formats per subtopic"];
  calendar [label="Prompt 4: 30-DAY CALENDAR\nPlatform-adapted posts\nwith metrics and distribution"];

  core -> angles;
  angles -> branches;
  branches -> calendar;
}

Prompt 1: THE CORE

You MUST ask clarifying questions before producing output. Do not skip this.

Ask about:

  • Goal (what outcome does this content serve?)
  • Target audience (who specifically?)
  • Pain points (what keeps them up at night?)
  • Constraints (budget, team size, tools available?)
  • Tone (professional, casual, provocative, educational?)
  • Platforms (Threads, Reels, TikTok, LinkedIn, email, YouTube?)

After receiving answers, deliver:

DeliverableSpec
Core problemOne specific problem people discuss and share
Why it matters2-3 sharp sentences
30-day content goalsMeasurable outcomes (saves, leads, shares — not vanity metrics)
ICP tableSee format below

ICP Table Format:

WhoWhat they wantWhat blocks themTheir languageTriggersTaboos

Be specific. Generic personas ("busy professionals") fail. Use language the audience actually uses.

Prompt 2: ANGLES & HEADLINES

Generate 7 unexpected angles from the core problem. Each angle must be:

  • Counterintuitive, OR
  • "You're doing it wrong", OR
  • Myth vs reality, OR
  • Hidden cost of the usual solution

For each angle, provide ALL of these:

ElementConstraint
2 hooksEach ≤12 words, platform-ready (Threads/Reels)
1 core insight≤80 words
1 number/factWith source citation — see Credibility Gate below
1 controversial statementDesigned to spark comments

Credibility Gate (mandatory for every angle's number/fact):

Write exactly one line in this form:

Source: [publication/study/author, year] — [one-sentence fact]

Fail condition: If no verifiable source exists for the claimed fact, the angle is blocked. Do not proceed with that angle until a real source is supplied. Generate a replacement angle if needed.

The 7 angles must not overlap. If two angles feel similar, cut one and find something sharper.

Prompt 3: BRANCHES

For each of the 7 angles, create 3 subtopics. Each subtopic must pass the Cliche Inversion Gate before proceeding:

Cliche Inversion Gate (mandatory for every subtopic):

  1. Write a one-sentence "Obvious Version" — the cliche take a mediocre writer would produce on this subtopic.
  2. Write a one-sentence "Inversion Statement" in this exact form: "Unlike [obvious version], this subtopic argues/shows [specific contradiction]."
  3. If the Inversion Statement cannot be completed with a concrete contradiction (a negation like "not X" does not count — it must assert something specific and different), the subtopic is rejected. Generate a replacement and repeat.

Show both sentences inline before presenting each subtopic's formats. A reviewer must be able to verify the gate passed without knowing the method.

For each subtopic that passes the gate, create 3 formats:

Format 1: Educational

  • Hook (≤2 lines)
  • Insight (≤80 words)
  • 3 concrete "do this today" steps

Format 2: Provocative

  • Debatable hook
  • 3 supporting proofs
  • Question at the end (drives comments)

Format 3: Case Study

  • Context (situation before)
  • Action (what changed)
  • Numbers (measurable result)
  • Takeaway (one sentence)

If data is missing for case studies, ask the user — do not fabricate numbers.

Prompt 4: 30-DAY CALENDAR

For each piece of content from Prompt 3, adapt for the user's specified platforms:

  • Adjust length per platform norms
  • Specify visual format (carousel, reel, text post, thread, etc.)
  • Include a CTA appropriate to the platform
  • Define a success metric for each post

Build the calendar as a table:

DatePlatformTopicAngleFormatGoal/MetricDistribution Notes

Calendar rules:

  • Remove repetition — no two posts should feel like the same take
  • Alternate topics to avoid audience fatigue
  • Note repurposing opportunities (clips, carousels from long-form, etc.)
  • Front-load problem-awareness content, back-load solution content

Common Mistakes

MistakeFix
Generic angles"5 tips for X" is not an angle. Push for counterintuitive, myth-busting, or hidden-cost framing.
Inversion Statement that merely negates"Unlike X, this shows not-X" fails the gate. The contradiction must assert something specific.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Use when evaluating, designing, or pressure-testing the business model of an AI agent product. Triggers on "agent business model", "agent economics", "agent canvas", "evaluate agent product", "agent pricing", "agent unit economics", "agentic business", "AI agent company", "agent cost structure".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

harperreed/dotfiles3352026년 10월 16일 업데이트

Create user-facing App Store release notes by collecting and summarizing all user-impacting changes since the last git tag (or a specified ref). Use when asked to generate a comprehensive release changelog, App Store "What's New" text, or release notes based on git history or tags.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

harperreed/dotfiles3352026년 10월 16일 업데이트

Use when someone wants to launch a content brand from scratch on any platform. Triggers on "launch a channel", "start a YouTube channel", "build a podcast", "start a newsletter", "content brand", "creator launchpad", "build my audience", "start creating content", "grow on TikTok", "start a blog".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

harperreed/dotfiles3352026년 10월 16일 업데이트

Use when you have an existing pipeline DOT file that needs review, fixing, or validation. Use when validation produces warnings or errors, when a DOT file was hand-written or generated by another tool, or when you want to verify a pipeline covers 100% of a spec before running it.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

harperreed/dotfiles3352026년 10월 16일 업데이트

Use when you want to build a project but don't have a spec yet and need to brainstorm the idea into a design doc structured for pipeline DOT generation. Use when starting from a vague idea, project concept, or feature request that needs to become a headless autonomous build pipeline.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

harperreed/dotfiles3352026년 10월 16일 업데이트

Use when you have a spec, design doc, structured plan, or prompt_plan and need to generate a pipeline Graphviz DOT file for headless autonomous building. The agent reads the spec, extracts build pipeline phases, determines tech stack, asks about human gates and model preferences, generates a validated DOT digraph with rich self-contained prompts, and saves it to the project root. Handles any language or framework.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

harperreed/dotfiles3352026년 10월 16일 업데이트

harperreed의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고