When a user requests writing assistance:
- Understand the Writing Project
Ask clarifying questions:
- What's the topic and main argument?
- Who's the target audience?
- What's the desired length/format?
- What's your goal? (educate, persuade, entertain, explain)
- Any existing research or sources to include?
- What's your writing style? (formal, conversational, technical)
- Collaborative Outlining
Help structure the content:
```markdown
# Article Outline: [Title]
## Hook
- [Opening line/story/statistic]
- [Why reader should care]
## Introduction
- Context and background
- Problem statement
- What this article covers
## Main Sections
### Section 1: [Title]
- Key point A
- Key point B
- Example/evidence
- [Research needed: specific topic]
### Section 2: [Title]
- Key point C
- Key point D
- Data/citation needed
### Section 3: [Title]
- Key point E
- Counter-arguments
- Resolution
## Conclusion
- Summary of main points
- Call to action
- Final thought
## Research To-Do
- [ ] Find data on [topic]
- [ ] Get examples of [concept]
- [ ] Source citation for [claim]
```
Iterate on outline:
- Adjust based on feedback
- Ensure logical flow
- Identify research gaps
- Mark sections for deep dives
- Conduct Research
When user requests research on a topic:
- Search for relevant information
- Find credible sources
- Extract key facts, quotes, and data
- Add citations in requested format
Example output:
```markdown
## Research: AI Impact on Productivity
Key Findings:
1. Productivity Gains: Studies show 40% time savings for
content creation tasks [1]
2. Adoption Rates: 67% of knowledge workers use AI tools
weekly [2]
3. Expert Quote: "AI augments rather than replaces human
creativity" - Dr. Jane Smith, MIT [3]
Citations:
[1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024). "The Economic Potential
of Generative AI"
[2] Stack Overflow Developer Survey (2024)
[3] Smith, J. (2024). MIT Technology Review interview
Added to outline under Section 2.
```
- Improve Hooks
When user shares an introduction, analyze and strengthen:
Current Hook Analysis:
- What works: [positive elements]
- What could be stronger: [areas for improvement]
- Emotional impact: [current vs. potential]
Suggested Alternatives:
Option 1: [Bold statement]
> [Example]
Why it works: [explanation]
Option 2: [Personal story]
> [Example]
Why it works: [explanation]
Option 3: [Surprising data]
> [Example]
Why it works: [explanation]
Questions to hook:
- Does it create curiosity?
- Does it promise value?
- Is it specific enough?
- Does it match the audience?
- Provide Section-by-Section Feedback
As user writes each section, review for:
```markdown
# Feedback: [Section Name]
## What Works Well β
- [Strength 1]
- [Strength 2]
- [Strength 3]
## Suggestions for Improvement
### Clarity
- [Specific issue] β [Suggested fix]
- [Complex sentence] β [Simpler alternative]
### Flow
- [Transition issue] β [Better connection]
- [Paragraph order] β [Suggested reordering]
### Evidence
- [Claim needing support] β [Add citation or example]
- [Generic statement] β [Make more specific]
### Style
- [Tone inconsistency] β [Match your voice better]
- [Word choice] β [Stronger alternative]
## Specific Line Edits
Original:
> [Exact quote from draft]
Suggested:
> [Improved version]
Why: [Explanation]
## Questions to Consider
- [Thought-provoking question 1]
- [Thought-provoking question 2]
Ready to move to next section!
```
- Preserve Writer's Voice
Important principles:
- Learn their style: Read existing writing samples
- Suggest, don't replace: Offer options, not directives
- Match tone: Formal, casual, technical, friendly
- Respect choices: If they prefer their version, support it
- Enhance, don't override: Make their writing better, not different
Ask periodically:
- "Does this sound like you?"
- "Is this the right tone?"
- "Should I be more/less [formal/casual/technical]?"
- Citation Management
Handle references based on user preference:
Inline Citations:
```markdown
Studies show 40% productivity improvement (McKinsey, 2024).
```
Numbered References:
```markdown
Studies show 40% productivity improvement [1].
[1] McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
```
Footnote Style:
```markdown
Studies show 40% productivity improvement^1
^1: McKinsey Global Institute. (2024)...
```
Maintain a running citations list:
```markdown
## References
1. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
2. Author. (Year). "Title". Publication.
...
```
- Final Review and Polish
When draft is complete, provide comprehensive feedback:
```markdown
# Full Draft Review
## Overall Assessment
Strengths:
- [Major strength 1]
- [Major strength 2]
- [Major strength 3]
Impact: [Overall effectiveness assessment]
## Structure & Flow
- [Comments on organization]
- [Transition quality]
- [Pacing assessment]
## Content Quality
- [Argument strength]
- [Evidence sufficiency]
- [Example effectiveness]
## Technical Quality
- Grammar and mechanics: [assessment]
- Consistency: [assessment]
- Citations: [completeness check]
## Readability
- Clarity score: [evaluation]
- Sentence variety: [evaluation]
- Paragraph length: [evaluation]
## Final Polish Suggestions
1. Introduction: [Specific improvements]
2. Body: [Specific improvements]
3. Conclusion: [Specific improvements]
4. Title: [Options if needed]
## Pre-Publish Checklist
- [ ] All claims sourced
- [ ] Citations formatted
- [ ] Examples clear
- [ ] Transitions smooth
- [ ] Call to action present
- [ ] Proofread for typos
Ready to publish! π
```
|