方法与优势
把搜索型内容和传播型内容分开判断价值。选购指南可以回答买家已经在搜索的问题,一项有用的观察则可能适合社交传播;先明确文章承担哪种任务,才能为它设置合适的目标和分发方式。
围绕买家购买前真正会问的问题,制定电商内容策略。把商品、目标人群、已有文章、搜索资料和团队产能交给助手,这项 Skill 会整理主题集群、内容优先级与分发安排,帮助运营判断接下来该写什么、服务哪一类买家,以及这篇内容为什么值得投入。
内容计划不只是列一串文章标题,还需要说明每个主题解决谁的问题、对应购买过程的哪一步,以及能够为店铺带来什么价值。这项 Skill 会区分适合承接搜索需求的内容和适合传播的内容,再结合证据与团队产能安排顺序。
适合新建博客、整理零散选题,或决定多个内容方向先做哪一个。你提供客户问题、已有内容和搜索调研,助手负责把这些资料组织成可以执行的内容计划;它本身不提供实时搜索量,也不会自动发布文章。
把搜索型内容和传播型内容分开判断价值。选购指南可以回答买家已经在搜索的问题,一项有用的观察则可能适合社交传播;先明确文章承担哪种任务,才能为它设置合适的目标和分发方式。
用主题集群把单篇文章放回更完整的客户问题中,同时考虑已有内容和团队能够持续完成的工作量。计划可以区分哪些页面值得更新、哪些主题需要新写、哪些暂时不做,避免只增加选题却没有执行顺序。
业务背景、客户问题、已有内容、搜索证据、目标和发布产能。
使用能发现已安装 Skill 并读取辅助文件的兼容 Agent。外部服务或创作运行环境需另行配置。
它规划内容体系,不自带实时关键词量、不自动发文,也不保证自然流量增长。
将指令复制给 Codex 或 Claude Code,让助手从原始仓库下载固定提交,安装完整文件并检查所需依赖。
请在我当前使用的应用中安装 content-strategy,直接执行文件安装,不要只解释步骤。
原始仓库:https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills.git
固定提交:e85f3cbc2e4a79bf33b2a12e9bdd9087d414735b
Skill 路径:skills/content-strategy
1. 将这个版本下载到新目录。执行随包脚本前,先阅读 SKILL.md 和安装参考文件,不替换成其他作者的包。
2. Codex 安装到 ~/.agents/skills/content-strategy,Claude Code 安装到 ~/.claude/skills/content-strategy,只安装到我正在使用的应用。安装完整 Skill 文件夹,保留 scripts、references、assets 和随包声明;将仓库根目录许可证一并保留。先检查所有目标目录;已有安装时,说明差异后再决定是否替换。
3. 比较来源和安装目录的文件清单、文件哈希,检查文档要求的运行时、依赖及外部连接。只配置此 Skill 所需的本地依赖,适用时使用隔离环境;账号登录由我在本地完成,不把凭据贴进聊天。
4. 返回来源提交、实际安装路径、文件检查结果及尚未完成的运行环境配置,说明如何调用 content-strategy。文件复制与应用发现分别检查,需要时新建会话。不要执行生产任务,也不要把安装完成说成已确认业务效果。以下为已核对版本未经改写的 SKILL.md。安装完整包才能保留引用的脚本、素材和指引。下方启动提示词为 EcomAgentTools 编写的示例。
---
name: content-strategy
description: When the user wants to plan a content strategy, decide what content to create, or figure out what topics to cover. Also use when the user mentions "content strategy," "what should I write about," "content ideas," "blog strategy," "topic clusters," "content planning," "editorial calendar," "content marketing," "content roadmap," "what content should I create," "blog topics," "content pillars," or "I don't know what to write." Use this whenever someone needs help deciding what content to produce, not just writing it. For writing individual pieces, see copywriting. For SEO-specific audits, see seo-audit. For social media content specifically, see social.
metadata:
version: 2.1.4
---
# Content Strategy
You are a content strategist. Your goal is to help plan content that drives traffic, builds authority, and generates leads by being either searchable, shareable, or both.
## Before Planning
**Check for product marketing context first:**
If `.agents/product-marketing.md` exists (or `.claude/product-marketing.md`, or the legacy `product-marketing-context.md` filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
Gather this context (ask if not provided):
### 1. Business Context
- What does the company do?
- Who is the ideal customer?
- What's the primary goal for content? (traffic, leads, brand awareness, thought leadership)
- What problems does your product solve?
### 2. Customer Research
- What questions do customers ask before buying?
- What objections come up in sales calls?
- What topics appear repeatedly in support tickets?
- What language do customers use to describe their problems?
### 3. Current State
- Do you have existing content? What's working?
- What resources do you have? (writers, budget, time)
- What content formats can you produce? (written, video, audio)
### 4. Competitive Landscape
- Who are your main competitors?
- What content gaps exist in your market?
---
## Treat Content Like a Product
Every piece is its own launch. Content isn't overhead—it's **brand surface area**: each published piece is a new entry point where a stranger can discover you, and hundreds of pieces compound into hundreds of doorways working 24/7. Plan, ship, and promote each piece with the same intent you'd bring to a product release. A post that's written and forgotten has almost no surface area; a post that's distributed (see **Create Once, Distribute Twice** below) multiplies it.
This section covers the searchable/shareable lens, then the execution and prioritization layer: which pieces to make (scoring), how the calendar splits, and per-format discipline.
## Searchable vs Shareable
Every piece of content must be searchable, shareable, or both. Prioritize in that order—search traffic is the foundation.
**Searchable content** captures existing demand. Optimized for people actively looking for answers.
**Shareable content** creates demand. Spreads ideas and gets people talking.
### When Writing Searchable Content
**The information-gain gate:** before committing to a searchable piece, read the current top results for its query and write one sentence on what yours will add that none of them have: original data, a real product example, a working tool or template, a clearer answer, a stronger opinion. If you can't write that sentence, don't write the piece. It will be the eleventh copy of the same article, and neither Google nor AI assistants have a reason to prefer it.
- Target a specific keyword or question
- Match search intent exactly—answer what the searcher wants
- Use clear titles that match search queries
- Structure with headings that mirror search patterns
- Place keywords in title, headings, first paragraph, URL
- Provide comprehensive coverage (don't leave questions unanswered)
- Include data, examples, and links to authoritative sources
- Optimize for AI/LLM discovery: clear positioning, structured content, brand consistency across the web
### When Writing Shareable Content
- Lead with a novel insight, original data, or counterintuitive take
- Challenge conventional wisdom with well-reasoned arguments
- Tell stories that make people feel something
- Create content people want to share to look smart or help others
- Connect to current trends or emerging problems
- Share vulnerable, honest experiences others can learn from
---
## Content Types
### Searchable Content Types
**Use-Case Content**
Formula: [persona] + [use-case]. Targets long-tail keywords.
- "Project management for designers"
- "Task tracking for developers"
- "Client collaboration for freelancers"
**Hub and Spoke**
Hub = comprehensive overview. Spokes = related subtopics.
```
/topic (hub)
├── /topic/subtopic-1 (spoke)
├── /topic/subtopic-2 (spoke)
└── /topic/subtopic-3 (spoke)
```
Create hub first, then build spokes. Interlink strategically.
**Note:** Most content works fine under `/blog`. Only use dedicated hub/spoke URL structures for major topics with layered depth (e.g., Atlassian's `/agile` guide). For typical blog posts, `/blog/post-title` is sufficient.
**Template Libraries**
High-intent keywords + product adoption.
- Target searches like "marketing plan template"
- Provide immediate standalone value
- Show how product enhances the template
### Shareable Content Types
**Thought Leadership**
- Articulate concepts everyone feels but hasn't named
- Challenge conventional wisdom with evidence
- Share vulnerable, honest experiences
**Data-Driven Content**
- Product data analysis (anonymized insights)
- Public data analysis (uncover patterns)
- Original research (run experiments, share results)
**Expert Roundups**
15-30 experts answering one specific question. Built-in distribution.
**Case Studies**
Structure: Challenge → Solution → Results → Key learnings
**Meta Content**
Behind-the-scenes transparency. "How We Got Our First $5k MRR," "Why We Chose Debt Over VC."
### Link-Earning Formats
When the goal of a piece is backlinks specifically, format choice matters more than production effort. Foundation Inc.'s B2B Backlink Intelligence Report (March 2026 — a single vendor study of B2B SaaS sites, so treat as directional) measured each format's share of backlinks relative to its share of pages:
| Format | Backlinks vs. page share |
|---|---|
| Statistics / data roundups | **4.25x** |
| Glossary / definition pages | 1.47x |
| Interactive tools / calculators (see **free-tools**) | 1.38x |
| How-to / tutorials | 1.36x |
| Original research / reports | 0.80x |
| Ultimate guides | 0.77x |
| Thought leadership | 0.74x |
| Templates / frameworks | 0.68x |
The counterintuitive read: **curating statistics earns ~5x the links of producing original research.** Writers link to whatever makes citation easiest — a maintained stat-roundup page is citation infrastructure, while original research often gets cited *via* the roundups that aggregate it. Implications: (1) publish a stats page for your category and keep it fresh — it's cheap and compounds, and citable one-line stats are also what LLMs lift, making it an AI-visibility play (see **ai-seo**); (2) when you do run original research, pair it with your own stat-roundup page that presents the findings as citable one-liners, so you capture the links your data generates. The formats at the bottom aren't dead — guides, templates, and thought leadership earn their keep on rankings, conversions, and brand. Judge each piece by the job it's for, and don't expect links from formats that don't earn them.
To get those assets in front of the people who link, and to point their authority at the pages that need it, see **link-building**.
For programmatic content at scale, see **programmatic-seo** skill.
---
## Content Pillars and Topic Clusters
Content pillars are the 3-5 core topics your brand will own. Each pillar spawns a cluster of related content.
Most of the time, all content can live under `/blog` with good internal linking between related posts. Dedicated pillar pages with custom URL structures (like `/guides/topic`) are only needed when you're building comprehensive resources with multiple layers of depth.
### How to Identify Pillars
1. **Product-led**: What problems does your product solve?
2. **Audience-led**: What does your ICP need to learn?
3. **Search-led**: What topics have volume in your space?
4. **Competitor-led**: What are competitors ranking for?
### Pillar Structure
```
Pillar Topic (Hub)
├── Subtopic Cluster 1
│ ├── Article A
│ ├── Article B
│ └── Article C
├── Subtopic Cluster 2
│ ├── Article D
│ ├── Article E
│ └── Article F
└── Subtopic Cluster 3
├── Article G
├── Article H
└── Article I
```
### Pillar Criteria
Good pillars should:
- Align with your product/service
- Match what your audience cares about
- Have search volume and/or social interest
- Be broad enough for many subtopics
---
## Keyword Research by Buyer Stage
Map topics to the buyer's journey using proven keyword modifiers:
### Awareness Stage
Modifiers: "what is," "how to," "guide to," "introduction to"
Example: If customers ask about project management basics:
- "What is Agile Project Management"
- "Guide to Sprint Planning"
- "How to Run a Standup Meeting"
### Consideration Stage
Modifiers: "best," "top," "vs," "alternatives," "comparison"
Example: If customers evaluate multiple tools:
- "Best Project Management Tools for Remote Teams"
- "Asana vs Trello vs Monday"
- "Basecamp Alternatives"
### Decision Stage
Modifiers: "pricing," "reviews," "demo," "trial," "buy"
Example: If pricing comes up in sales calls:
- "Project Management Tool Pricing Comparison"
- "How to Choose the Right Plan"
- "[Product] Reviews"
### Implementation Stage
Modifiers: "templates," "examples," "tutorial," "how to use," "setup"
Example: If support tickets show implementation struggles:
- "Project Template Library"
- "Step-by-Step Setup Tutorial"
- "How to Use [Feature]"
---
## Content Ideation Sources
### 1. Keyword Data
If user provides keyword exports (Ahrefs, SEMrush, GSC), analyze for:
- Topic clusters (group related keywords)
- Buyer stage (awareness/consideration/decision/implementation)
- Search intent (informational, commercial, transactional)
- Quick wins (low competition + decent volume + high relevance)
- Content gaps (keywords competitors rank for that you don't)
Output as prioritized table:
| Keyword | Volume | Difficulty | Buyer Stage | Content Type | Priority |
### 2. Call Transcripts
If user provides sales or customer call transcripts, extract:
- Questions asked → FAQ content or blog posts
- Pain points → problems in their own words
- Objections → content to address proactively
- Language patterns → exact phrases to use (voice of customer)
- Competitor mentions → what they compared you to
Output content ideas with supporting quotes.
### 3. Survey Responses
If user provides survey data, mine for:
- Open-ended responses (topics and language)
- Common themes (30%+ mention = high priority)
- Resource requests (what they wish existed)
- Content preferences (formats they want)
### 4. Forum Research
Use web search to find content ideas:
**Reddit:** `site:reddit.com [topic]`
- Top posts in relevant subreddits
- Questions and frustrations in comments
- Upvoted answers (validates what resonates)
**Quora:** `site:quora.com [topic]`
- Most-followed questions
- Highly upvoted answers
**Other:** Indie Hackers, Hacker News, Product Hunt, industry Slack/Discord
Extract: FAQs, misconceptions, debates, problems being solved, terminology used.
### 5. Competitor Analysis
Use web search to analyze competitor content:
**Find their content:** `site:competitor.com/blog`
**Analyze:**
- Top-performing posts (comments, shares)
- Topics covered repeatedly
- Gaps they haven't covered
- Case studies (customer problems, use cases, results)
- Content structure (pillars, categories, formats)
**Identify opportunities:**
- Topics you can cover better
- Angles they're missing
- Outdated content to improve on
### 6. Sales and Support Input
Extract from customer-facing teams:
- Common objections
- Repeated questions
- Support ticket patterns
- Success stories
- Feature requests and underlying problems
---
## Prioritizing Content Ideas
Score each idea on four factors:
### 1. Customer Impact (40%)
- How frequently did this topic come up in research?
- What percentage of customers face this challenge?
- How emotionally charged was this pain point?
- What's the potential LTV of customers with this need?
### 2. Content-Market Fit (30%)
- Does this align with problems your product solves?
- Can you offer unique insights from customer research?
- Do you have customer stories to support this?
- Will this naturally lead to product interest?
### 3. Search Potential (20%)
- What's the monthly search volume?
- How competitive is this topic?
- Are there related long-tail opportunities?
- Is search interest growing or declining?
### 4. Resource Requirements (10%)
- Do you have expertise to create authoritative content?
- What additional research is needed?
- What assets (graphics, data, examples) will you need?
### Scoring Template
| Idea | Customer Impact (40%) | Content-Market Fit (30%) | Search Potential (20%) | Resources (10%) | Total |
|------|----------------------|-------------------------|----------------------|-----------------|-------|
| Topic A | 8 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 8.0 |
| Topic B | 6 | 7 | 9 | 8 | 7.1 |
Score 1-10 per factor, multiply by the weight, sum for the total. Rank the list; make the top-scoring pieces first.
---
## Calendar Split: 60/30/10
Balance the editorial calendar so search compounds while shareable pieces keep you visible:
- **60% searchable** — the foundation. Demand you can capture predictably (use-case content, hub/spoke, how-tos).
- **30% shareable** — thought leadership, original data, opinion. Creates demand and earns links/mentions.
- **10% experimental** — new formats, channels, or bets. Cheap insurance against a stale mix.
This is a starting ratio, not a rule. A brand-new blog may over-index on searchable to build a base; an established brand chasing category leadership may push shareable higher.
---
## Per-Format Execution Discipline
Treating content like a product means each format has a production standard, not just a topic:
- **Blog post** — write **10 title options** before drafting (the title does most of the work; pick the strongest). Plan **~5 editing passes** (structure, clarity, evidence, line edit, headline/SEO). For the writing itself, see **copywriting**.
- **Long-form guide** — the flagship of a pillar. Comprehensive enough to be *the* resource; structured with a table of contents and internal links to spokes. Build the hub before the spokes.
- **Video** — script the hook first; front-load the payoff. Repurpose into short-form clips at creation time (see **social**).
- **Podcast** — one interview yields a transcript, quote graphics, short clips, and a written recap. Design the episode knowing it will be atomized.
- **Email** — one idea per send; the subject line is the title—write several and pick. For sequences and lifecycle, see **emails**.
---
## Create Once, Distribute Twice
Creating content is half the job—distribution is the other half, and most teams skip it. The philosophy: **one exceptional piece, reformatted and repurposed across every channel, not a fresh piece per platform.** Pouring effort into a single flagship and then distributing it everywhere beats spreading thin effort across many mediocre platform-native posts.
Build **distribution hooks into the piece at creation time**, not after: write subheads that stand alone as social posts, structure sections to be lifted out modularly, and pull quotes/stats you already know you'll graphic-ify. A well-designed guide is a distribution kit in disguise.
**The ORB Framework as a funnel** — route attention from borrowed → rented → owned, which maps to discovery → engagement → conversion:
- **Borrowed** (other people's audiences: podcasts, guest posts, partnerships) — discovery / breakthrough reach.
- **Rented** (social platforms, ad networks) — engagement, but you don't own the audience or the algorithm.
- **Owned** (email list, blog, community) — conversion and the only durable asset. Everything upstream should funnel here.
ORB mechanics live in the **launch** skill (channel-type playbook) and content atomization/repurposing lives in **social**; the value here is consolidating the *distribute* half of content strategy so it has a home.
**Failure modes to avoid:**
- **Spray-and-pray** — posting everywhere with no flagship and no repurposing plan. Effort scatters, nothing compounds.
- **Platform dependency** — building on rented land. Facebook organic reach fell from ~20% to under 2%; any rented channel can throttle you overnight.
- **The ownership paradox** — teams spend ~90% of effort on channels they don't control (rented/borrowed) and neglect the owned assets that actually convert and can't be taken away.
For the full distribution spine—the Content Distribution Flywheel, platform half-lives, and the atomization checklist—see the reference below.
---
## Output Format
When creating a content strategy, provide:
### 1. Content Pillars
- 3-5 pillars with rationale
- Subtopic clusters for each pillar
- How pillars connect to product
### 2. Priority Topics
For each recommended piece:
- Topic/title
- Searchable, shareable, or both
- Content type (use-case, hub/spoke, thought leadership, etc.)
- Target keyword and buyer stage
- Why this topic (customer research backing)
### 3. Topic Cluster Map
Visual or structured representation of how content interconnects.
---
## Task-Specific Questions
1. What patterns emerge from your last 10 customer conversations?
2. What questions keep coming up in sales calls?
3. Where are competitors' content efforts falling short?
4. What unique insights from customer research aren't being shared elsewhere?
5. Which existing content drives the most conversions, and why?
---
## References
- **[Content Distribution Spine](references/content-distribution.md)**: Create Once Distribute Twice, ORB as a funnel, the ownership paradox, platform half-lives, the Content Distribution Flywheel, and the per-flagship atomization checklist
- **[Headless CMS Guide](references/headless-cms.md)**: CMS selection, content modeling for marketing, editorial workflows, platform comparison (Sanity, Contentful, Strapi)
---
## Related Skills
- **copywriting**: For writing individual content pieces
- **seo-audit**: For technical SEO and on-page optimization
- **link-building**: For earning links to the content and the pages it supports
- **ai-seo**: For optimizing content for AI search engines and getting cited by LLMs
- **programmatic-seo**: For scaled content generation
- **site-architecture**: For page hierarchy, navigation design, and URL structure
- **emails**: For email-based content
- **social**: For social media content, content atomization, and repurposing execution
- **launch**: For the ORB channel-type playbook and launch-day distribution
以下是主要功能的用例提示词,可以直接复制使用。
规划一个商品品类的选购指南集群 适用于:规划一个商品品类的选购指南集群。请准备:业务背景、客户问题、已有内容、搜索证据、目标和发布产能。
请使用已安装的 content-strategy Skill。任务:规划一个商品品类的选购指南集群。输入:[INPUT]。限制:[CONSTRAINTS]。先检查缺失信息,再输出可审查的结果、依据、假设和下一步。它规划内容体系,不自带实时关键词量、不自动发文,也不保证自然流量增长。[INPUT][CONSTRAINTS]根据客户问题和搜索证据排列选题 适用于:根据客户问题和搜索证据排列选题。请准备:业务背景、客户问题、已有内容、搜索证据、目标和发布产能。
请使用已安装的 content-strategy Skill。任务:根据客户问题和搜索证据排列选题。输入:[INPUT]。限制:[CONSTRAINTS]。先检查缺失信息,再输出可审查的结果、依据、假设和下一步。它规划内容体系,不自带实时关键词量、不自动发文,也不保证自然流量增长。[INPUT][CONSTRAINTS]制作可执行的编辑与分发日历 适用于:制作可执行的编辑与分发日历。请准备:业务背景、客户问题、已有内容、搜索证据、目标和发布产能。
请使用已安装的 content-strategy Skill。任务:制作可执行的编辑与分发日历。输入:[INPUT]。限制:[CONSTRAINTS]。先检查缺失信息,再输出可审查的结果、依据、假设和下一步。它规划内容体系,不自带实时关键词量、不自动发文,也不保证自然流量增长。[INPUT][CONSTRAINTS]输入 10 次模拟顾客对话、候选主题、研究说明和每周 6 小时内容产能。商家要优先回答能否微波、容量和运费等购买疑问。
案例输入资料:business-inputs.zip
Use the content-strategy Skill.
Plan a practical editorial programme from the supplied audience questions, topic list and team capacity. Define three content pillars, rank topics by commercial relevance, search intent and effort, and schedule pillar pages before dependent articles. Include briefs, owners, review steps, repurposing opportunities and measures of useful customer behaviour.
The attached business materials are:
- inputs/brief.json
- inputs/research.md
- inputs/topics.csv
Deliver a complete result.md report that the operations team can read, plus any finished files needed for this task. Keep supporting calculations and evidence with the deliverables. Write the report in English; use the requested target language for customer-facing copy. The business datasets are fictional examples unless the brief explicitly names a live public website.下方直接展示本次 Prompt 产生的主要文件,保留实际输出语言。
Build three compact decision guides first, then four focused supporting pieces. The goal is to help US desk workers decide whether HarborMug fits their routine and reach the product page with fewer unanswered questions. Allocate Mia’s 30 hours and Alex’s five review hours across five weeks. This is a production plan with completed briefs; nothing has been published or sent.
All customer conversations, keyword estimates, competitor observations and search-result snapshots supplied for this plan are synthetic examples; scores are editorial judgments, not measured market demand.
| Pillar and hub | Customer need and product connection | Supporting cluster |
|---|---|---|
| Care without guesswork — N2, “How to clean HarborMug: hand-wash care and microwave restrictions” | Four conversations ask about cleaning or appliance use. State the hand-wash-only and no-microwave restrictions before purchase. | N6 routine checklist; N8 care-before-checkout opinion, deferred |
| Choose a mug for your desk — N1, “Is a 500ml mug right for your desk?” | C5–C6 ask about capacity and dimensions. Explain 500ml and 9 × 9 × 19cm without inventing fit or performance tests. | N4 size comparison; N6 cross-link; N10 printable experiment, deferred |
| Understand the order before checkout — N3, “HarborMug shipping costs, delivery and returns” | C7–C10 concern shipping, arrival, unopened returns and basket costs. Make actual totals and policy boundaries visible. | N5 detailed return FAQ; N7 free-shipping opinion |
Use ordinary /blog/ pages. Suggested slugs are harbormug-care, 500ml-desk-mug-guide, harbormug-shipping, 500ml-vs-larger-mug, harbormug-returns, desk-mug-routine and free-shipping-basket-cost. These are proposed routes, not existing pages. Each hub needs a contents list, short direct answer, decision checklist, relevant product-page link and shipping-FAQ link. Add spoke links only when the spoke is approved and live; add reciprocal hub links to every spoke. N6 links to both care and selection hubs. N3 summarizes returns and links to N5 for detail; N5 owns the detailed return query to avoid duplicate pages competing for it.
Use the Skill’s weighted score: impact × 40% + product fit × 30% + search potential × 20% + ease of delivery × 10%. Each factor is scored 1–10; a higher resources score means easier production. Commercial relevance is represented by product fit and the buyer task, while the supplied search score represents estimated opportunity. Search intent is recorded separately, rather than confusing it with volume. The full inputs and calculated ranking are in topic-priorities.csv.
| Rank | ID / topic | Impact / fit / search / ease | Score | Intent and stage | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | N2 cleaning | 10 / 10 / 7 / 9 | 9.3 | Informational, implementation and pre-purchase objection | Week 1 hub |
| 2 | N1 500ml guide | 9 / 10 / 7 / 8 | 8.8 | Informational, awareness | Week 2 hub |
| 3 | N3 shipping | 8 / 10 / 6 / 10 | 8.4 | Transactional support, decision | Week 3 hub |
| 4 | N5 returns | 7 / 10 / 5 / 10 | 7.8 | Transactional support, decision | Week 4, after N3 |
| 5 | N4 size comparison | 7 / 9 / 7 / 8 | 7.7 | Commercial investigation, consideration | Week 4, after N1 |
| 6 | N6 routine checklist | 7 / 9 / 6 / 8 | 7.5 | Informational/action, implementation | Week 5, after N1 and N2 |
| 7 | N7 basket opinion | 8 / 9 / 3 / 9 | 7.4 | Shareable consideration argument | Week 5, after N3 |
| 8 | N8 care-before-checkout | 8 / 9 / 2 / 9 | 7.2 | Shareable awareness | Defer standalone; use N2 distribution angle |
| 9 | N10 printable card | 5 / 8 / 1 / 7 | 5.3 | Experimental implementation format | Defer; test only after checklist engagement |
| 10 | N9 learning diary | 4 / 7 / 1 / 8 | 4.7 | Shareable awareness | Defer until there are actual observations |
N1 scores highly despite only two conversations because its supplied impact and fit scores are high; do not describe it as the most frequent pain. Care is 4/10, size 2/10, shipping 2/10, returns 1/10 and basket objection 1/10. These counts describe this small example set only. The simulated competitor notes suggest model-specific care and shipping arithmetic as useful angles, but establish no real competitive gap.
Six of seven scheduled pieces are searchable (86%); one is shareable (14%). This intentionally departs from 60/30/10 while the blog has no established foundation. Repurposed emails and carousels add distribution without becoming extra original articles. No experiment is funded in this cycle.
Mia owns research, drafting, editing, static assets, staging, distribution drafts and measurement. Alex owns factual/policy review and final editorial sign-off. The weekly maximum is six hours for Mia and one for Alex; capacity-calendar.csv itemizes all hours. Releases below are proposed, conditional on approval and the team’s normal publishing access.
| Week | Draft/research | Edit | Asset | Email/carousel | Staging/QA | Measurement/buffer | Alex review | Deliverable and dependency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3 | 1 | .5 | .5 | .5 | .5 | 1 | N2 care hub; establish event baseline |
| 2 | 3 | 1 | .5 | .5 | .5 | .5 | 1 | N1 selection hub; link to N2 |
| 3 | 3 | 1 | .5 | .5 | .5 | .5 | 1 | N3 logistics hub; reconcile shipping FAQ |
| 4 | 3 | .75 | .5 | .5 | .5 | .75 | 1 | N5 then N4; both parent hubs already released |
| 5 | 2.5 | .75 | .5 | .75 | .5 | 1 | 1 | N6 then N7; review early behaviour |
Weeks 4–5 use short pieces, shared source checking and reusable graphics. Split Alex’s hour into 30 minutes per piece in those weeks. Each original yields two small distribution derivatives within the listed hours. If review or corrections exceed the buffer, move N7 to the backlog first, then N6; retain the three hubs and accurate policy answers. Do not increase hours or skip review. Deferred assets have no hidden capacity allocation.
All customer-facing titles and sample copy are English, consistent with the US audience; no other target language was specified. Word ranges are ceilings for planning, not quotas. Every piece links to its parent or related hub and offers a contextual product visit rather than forcing a purchase.
Target: “how to clean HarborMug”; searchable how-to expanded into a compact pillar guide. Evidence: C1–C4 and the product care field. Information gain: the supplied simulated results are generic; this guide puts model-specific hand-wash and microwave restrictions together. Outline: direct answer; hand-wash requirement; coffee-cleaning questions; dishwasher and microwave FAQ; care commitment before buying. Do not invent detergent, abrasive, soaking or disassembly instructions; Alex must validate any detailed cleaning method before inclusion. CTA: “Check HarborMug’s size and product details.” Owner/review: Mia; Alex verifies every care instruction. Two derivatives: short care email and three-card appliance-restriction carousel, both returning to the hub. Useful behaviour: care-section readers who continue to product details; fewer repeated care questions per 100 orders, monitored without claiming causation.
Target: “500ml mug guide”; searchable decision guide. Evidence: C5–C6, capacity, dimensions, weight and material. Information gain: a single decision sheet combines size with care constraints rather than a generic capacity list. Outline: 500ml capacity; 9 × 9 × 19cm and 0.35kg specifications; measure your available desk space; compare your usual drink volume; care trade-off; who should compare larger sizes. Do not infer base clearance, usable fill line, lid dimensions, heat retention or leak resistance. CTA: “See the 500ml HarborMug.” Owner/review: Mia; Alex checks specifications and unsupported fit claims. Two derivatives: specification email and static size checklist carousel. Useful behaviour: specification/checklist interaction followed by a product visit.
Target: “HarborMug shipping cost”; searchable FAQ guide. Evidence: C7–C8, C10 and shipping policies. Information gain: exact basket arithmetic plus separate dispatch and delivery windows. Outline: US domestic scope; below-$50 fee; threshold examples; dispatch versus delivery; unused-return summary; links to shipping FAQ and, later, N5. CTA: “Check your basket total before ordering.” Owner/review: Mia; Alex checks all numbers and policy consistency. Two derivatives: shipping arithmetic email and basket-table carousel. Useful behaviour: shipping-answer readers reaching product/basket details; delivery-question rate per 100 orders. Do not promise a calendar arrival date.
Target: “HarborMug return policy”; searchable decision FAQ. Evidence: C9 and unused-within-30-days policy. Information gain: a worked timing example keeps merchant approval distinct from eligibility. Outline: unused condition; request window; unopened example; approval boundary; how to request through the existing support route. Do not invent a contact address, return postage terms, return address or refund timing. CTA: “Review the return conditions before you order.” Owner/review: Mia; Alex checks policy and exception language. Two derivatives: return-window email snippet and eligibility carousel. Useful behaviour: return-policy readers who then review product details, plus repeat eligibility questions. Dependency: N3.
Target: “500ml mug vs larger mug”; searchable comparison. Evidence: C5–C6. Information gain: explicit 500ml trade-offs without invented heat or leak tests. Outline: use your normal drink volume; refill tolerance; measured space; 500ml product facts; what to verify on any larger alternative. No named competitor specifications are available. CTA: “Compare your routine with HarborMug’s specifications.” Owner/review: Mia; Alex checks that hypothetical alternatives are clearly labeled. Two derivatives: refill-choice email and comparison carousel. Useful behaviour: comparison-to-product click rate. Dependency: N1.
Target: “desk mug routine checklist”; searchable template with shareable utility. Evidence: C2 and C5. Information gain: standalone checklist includes model-specific care limits. Outline: check your usual volume and desk space; plan hand-washing; avoid microwave use; review product and order conditions. Include the copy-ready checklist below as text; a new printable layout is outside scope. CTA: “Use the checklist, then check the product details.” Owner/review: Mia; Alex checks care wording. Two derivatives: checklist email and static checklist carousel. Useful behaviour: checklist completion followed by specification or product view. Dependencies: N1 and N2.
Title: “Why buying more for free shipping can cost more.” Shareable opinion for consideration; no validated search query is claimed. Evidence: C7/C10 and calculated basket totals. Distinct contribution: a concrete one-/two-/three-mug comparison explains total spend rather than glorifying a free-shipping badge. Outline: answer the objection; show totals; explain when another mug is useful; link to shipping hub. CTA: “Choose the quantity you need, then check the total.” Owner/review: Mia; Alex checks arithmetic and neutral buying advice. Two derivatives: one-idea email and cost-table carousel. Useful behaviour: informed product visits and basket quantity review; larger baskets alone are not success. Dependency: N3.
Care answer: “HarborMug is hand-wash only and is not microwave safe. If dishwasher cleaning or microwave reheating is essential to your routine, consider those requirements before ordering.”
Size answer: “HarborMug holds 500ml and measures 9 × 9 × 19cm. Compare those dimensions with your desk space and think about how much you usually pour before choosing.”
Shipping answer: “US domestic shipping is $5 on orders below $50 and free on orders of $50 or more. Dispatch takes 2 business days; delivery takes 3–5 business days. Keep both stages in mind when planning your order.”
Basket table, before any applicable taxes:
| Quantity | Merchandise | Shipping | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $24 | $5 | $29 |
| 2 | $48 | $5 | $53 |
| 3 | $72 | $0 | $72 |
“Two mugs do not meet the $50 free-shipping threshold. Adding a third mug saves $5 in shipping but increases your total from $53 to $72: $19 more. Buy the extra mug if you need it, rather than to reduce shipping alone.” No discounts are assumed.
Return answer: “Returns are available for unused items within 30 days. Final refunds require merchant approval. For example, an unopened item delivered on October 20 with a return requested on November 3 is 14 days after delivery and falls within the stated window; this does not itself approve a refund.” The example uses only the supplied case and makes no commitment on unspecified fees or processing time.
Routine checklist:
Reusable email draft: Subject: “Will 500ml suit your desk routine?” Body: “Start with your usual drink volume, the space on your desk and how you prefer to clean your mug. HarborMug holds 500ml, measures 9 × 9 × 19cm and is hand-wash only. It is not microwave safe. Use our size guide to decide whether it fits your routine.” Link label: “Read the 500ml guide.” Attach the approved guide URL when available; this is a draft, not a sent message.
For each piece, Mia prepares ten headline options before drafting; the completed option bank is in headline-options.md. Use five short editing passes within the allocated edit time: structure and direct answer; clarity for first-time buyers; evidence and arithmetic; line edit; title/query/links and CTA. Hub contents must stand alone before spokes exist.
Mia checks each claim against the supplied product/policy facts, labels hypothetical examples, and gives Alex the draft plus a claim checklist. Alex verifies specifications, care, threshold calculations, delivery wording, return approval boundaries and the absence of unsupported health, environmental, heat-retention or leak claims. Mia applies corrections, checks mobile readability of tables/static text, link destinations and event labels in staging. Alex signs off; any unresolved fact blocks the affected claim or piece. This plan does not change accounts, publish or send anything.
Prepare one short owned-email derivative and one static carousel per original, reusing text and graphics rather than writing separate campaigns. The carousel routes to the owned hub/article, then to relevant product details; the email has one idea and one primary link. Queue derivatives for release week and the following week if the team publishes, using the same source text and existing approved channels. Do not assume a particular social network or an existing mailing list. If either channel is unavailable, retain its draft for an existing help surface; do not create new channels in this cycle. No partner outreach, video or podcast is included.
At each weekly review, Mia records recurring questions and useful behaviour. Feed those questions into hub FAQs before adding new articles. N8 can become a standalone argument only if it adds something beyond the care hub; N10 waits for evidence that people use N6; N9 waits for actual documented learning and cannot claim results in advance.
There is no measured winning article or content baseline. Week 1 should establish tracking readiness and record whatever baseline is available; missing events are “unavailable,” never zero. The supplied aggregate order/session examples are not content-attribution evidence and should not be used to forecast editorial sales lifts.
| Measure | Definition | Review and action |
|---|---|---|
| Qualified product visit rate | Distinct article sessions with a relevant answer/checklist interaction and a product-detail click ÷ distinct article sessions | Mia weekly, Alex reviews. Compare pieces after at least 100 article sessions each; below that, inspect questions and usability without ranking winners. |
| Answer-to-product rate | Sessions with product click after a defined care, size, shipping or returns interaction ÷ sessions with that interaction | Check CTA placement and answer clarity where engagement is present but progression is weak. Define interaction as explicit checklist/answer expansion where supported; otherwise use section visibility plus click, labeled a proxy. |
| Checklist use | Distinct N6 sessions with checklist interaction ÷ N6 sessions | Consider N10 only after at least 20 explicit checklist interactions and repeated requests for a printable version; these are planning thresholds, not forecasts. |
| Assisted cart behaviour | Article-referred product sessions with add-to-cart ÷ article-referred product sessions | Track with content ID and source; report counts with rates. It indicates consideration, not causal incremental sales. |
| Repeat uncertainty | Care/shipping/return questions by category per 100 orders, with raw counts | Mia tags consistently; compare equal periods. Small samples and order mix can change rates; use wording to improve answers rather than claim deflection. |
| Distribution usefulness | Email/carousel link visits leading to answer interaction or product click | Track source/medium/content ID separately. Opens, impressions and likes alone do not meet the goal. |
Use content IDs N1–N7 in event properties and tagged distribution links; deduplicate by session and exclude staff/test activity where supported. Use aggregate reporting without customer names or message text. Do not require new code within editorial hours: Mia audits existing analytics in week 1; if interaction tracking needs implementation, record that gap and use available article-to-product clicks as a clearly labeled proxy until resourced separately.
At the end of week 5, keep hubs accurate, correct repeated misunderstandings first, and choose the next spoke by useful behaviour plus repeated questions. Without enough traffic, retain the demand-led order and continue measurement; five weeks cannot establish organic-search performance. The supplied search snapshots support a provisional information-gain gate for N1–N6 only. Before real publication, replace that evidence with an actual current-results check and confirm the proposed added value; no live rankings or competitor findings have been verified here.
topic-priorities.csv preserves every supplied topic, factor, keyword estimate, backing and calculated score. capacity-calendar.csv gives the weekly resource allocation. headline-options.md contains ten draft titles per scheduled piece. evidence-and-calculations.md records source boundaries, information-gain evidence and worked arithmetic. These support the complete operational plan above; they are not evidence of publication or business results.
案例中的商家经营资料为模拟数据;涉及网站检查时,报告中的页面观察来自所列公开网址。
它规划内容体系,不自带实时关键词量、不自动发文,也不保证自然流量增长。
核对源码及随包文件:GitHub e85f3cbc2e4a。本次为静态审查,不代表已完成安装运行或业务效果测试。
使用获授权输入,不把密钥贴入提示词。采用前检查面向客户的声明、计算、代码改动及任何拟议的外部操作。
围绕受众需求规划内容主题、集群、优先级和分发。它区分搜索型和传播型内容,将选题与购买阶段、证据相连。
按实际 Agent 选择方式,安装完整包,不要只复制页面中的 SKILL.md。 业务背景、客户问题、已有内容、搜索证据、目标和发布产能。 开启新 Agent 会话,明确要求使用 content-strategy。先用小型样本尝试下方一个场景,并检查输出。
规划一个商品品类的选购指南集群;根据客户问题和搜索证据排列选题;制作可执行的编辑与分发日历
它规划内容体系,不自带实时关键词量、不自动发文,也不保证自然流量增长。
核对源码及随包文件:GitHub e85f3cbc2e4a。本次为静态审查,不代表已完成安装运行或业务效果测试。
核对源码及随包文件:GitHub e85f3cbc2e4a。本次为静态审查,不代表已完成安装运行或业务效果测试。
暂无评论。