eb96e32c58
Incorporates 163 upstream commits (origin/main) while preserving all local skills, agents, and commands. Metadata descriptions updated to reflect actual component counts (30 agents, 56 skills, 7 commands). file-todos/SKILL.md merged with both upstream command rename and local assessment fields. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
97 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
97 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: essay-outline
|
|
description: Transform a brain dump into a story-structured essay outline. Pressure tests the idea, validates story structure using the Saunders framework, and produces a tight outline written to file.
|
|
argument-hint: "[brain dump — your raw ideas, however loose]"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Essay Outline
|
|
|
|
Turn a brain dump into a story-structured essay outline.
|
|
|
|
## Brain Dump
|
|
|
|
<brain_dump> #$ARGUMENTS </brain_dump>
|
|
|
|
**If the brain dump above is empty, ask the user:** "What's the idea? Paste your brain dump — however raw or loose."
|
|
|
|
Do not proceed until you have a brain dump.
|
|
|
|
## Execution
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: Idea Triage
|
|
|
|
Read the brain dump and locate the potential thesis — the single thing worth saying. Ask: would a smart, skeptical reader finish this essay and think "I needed that"?
|
|
|
|
Play devil's advocate. This is the primary job. Look for:
|
|
|
|
- **Weak thesis** — Is this a real insight, or just a topic? A topic is not a thesis. "Remote work is complicated" is a topic. "Remote work didn't fail the office — the office failed remote work" is a thesis.
|
|
- **Missing payoff** — What does the reader walk away with that they didn't have before? If there's no answer, say so.
|
|
- **Broken connective tissue** — Do the ideas connect causally ("and therefore") or just sequentially ("and another thing")? Sequential ideas are a list, not an essay.
|
|
- **Unsupported claims** — Use outside research to pressure-test assertions. If a claim doesn't hold up, flag it and explore whether it can be rescued.
|
|
|
|
**If nothing survives triage:** Say directly — "There's nothing here yet." Then ask one question aimed at finding a salvageable core. Do not produce an outline for an idea that hasn't earned one.
|
|
|
|
**If the idea survives but has weaknesses:** Identify the weakest link and collaboratively generate a fix before moving to Phase 2.
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: Story Structure Check
|
|
|
|
Load the `story-lens` skill. Apply the Saunders framework to the *idea* — not prose. The essay may not involve characters. That's fine. Translate the framework as follows:
|
|
|
|
| Saunders diagnostic | Applied to essay ideas |
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Beat causality | Does each supporting point *cause* the reader to need the next one, or do they merely follow it? |
|
|
| Escalation | Does each beat raise the stakes of the thesis — moving the reader further from where they started? |
|
|
| Story-yet test | If the essay ended after the hook, would anything have changed for the reader? After the first supporting point? Each beat must earn its place. |
|
|
| Efficiency | Is every idea doing work? Cut anything that elaborates without advancing. |
|
|
| Expectation | Does each beat land at the right level — surprising but not absurd, inevitable in hindsight? |
|
|
| Moral/technical unity | If something feels off — a point that doesn't land, a conclusion that feels unearned — find the structural failure underneath. |
|
|
|
|
**The non-negotiables:**
|
|
- The hook must create a specific expectation that the essay then fulfills or subverts
|
|
- Supporting beats must escalate — each one should make the thesis harder to dismiss, not just add to it
|
|
- The conclusion must deliver irreversible change in the reader's understanding — they cannot un-think what the essay showed them
|
|
|
|
Flag any diagnostic failures. For each failure, propose a fix. If the structure cannot be made to escalate, say so.
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: Outline Construction
|
|
|
|
Produce the outline only after the idea has survived Phases 1 and 2.
|
|
|
|
**Structure:**
|
|
- Hook — the opening move that sets an expectation
|
|
- Supporting beats — each one causal, each one escalating
|
|
- Conclusion — the irreversible change delivered to the reader
|
|
|
|
**Format rules:**
|
|
- Bullets and sub-bullets only
|
|
- Max 3 sub-bullets per bullet
|
|
- No sub-sub-bullets
|
|
- Each bullet is a *beat*, not a topic — it should imply forward motion
|
|
- Keep it short. A good outline is a skeleton, not a draft.
|
|
|
|
**Write the outline to file:**
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
docs/outlines/YYYY-MM-DD-[slug].md
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Ensure `docs/outlines/` exists before writing. The slug should be 3-5 words derived from the thesis, hyphenated.
|
|
|
|
## Output Summary
|
|
|
|
When complete, display:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Outline complete.
|
|
|
|
File: docs/outlines/YYYY-MM-DD-[slug].md
|
|
|
|
Thesis: [one sentence]
|
|
Story verdict: [passes / passes with fixes / nothing here]
|
|
|
|
Key structural moves:
|
|
- [Hook strategy]
|
|
- [How the beats escalate]
|
|
- [What the conclusion delivers]
|
|
```
|