Thought Leadership
SkillDev tools'Creates long-form thought leadership articles and whitepapers through a 3-phase human-in-the-loop process (outline,
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the Thought Leadership skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by matteotitta/genesys-skills in skills/primitives/content/execution/thought-leadership/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Doctrine inherited (Step 7 — 0626 rollout)
Output complies with:
output-tenets.md— the seven tenets (Storytelling/SQCA is Tenet 7)output-simplicity.md— length caps, three-layer source placement, robot-tells banai-speak-anti-patterns.md— the 12 patterns thought-leadership hooks can't carry- Step 6 calibration: see [[feedback_execution_doctrine_refinements_step6]]
Refinements applied to this skill:
| Code | Refinement | How it lands in thought-leadership |
|---|---|---|
| R1 | Source placement (three layers) | Published essay is end-customer-facing. No [VERIFIED:...] tags inline. Citations convert to inline links inside the prose at publish time (e.g., "Tan's post on Series A spread"). Working draft carries internal [VERIFIED:...] for the phase-1 → phase-2 review gate, stripped before phase 3 polish. |
| R3 | Product-update tone | When the essay references the author's product, frame as "we ship X" not "we are thrilled to announce." The contrarian angle does the work — adjectives don't. |
| R5 | Blog as voice anchor | Long-form essay IS the voice anchor. Downstream LinkedIn / newsletter / podcast assets paraphrase forward from the essay's opening line — that's where R5 originates upstream. |
| R9 | Action-oriented section names | Section headers state the claim (not "Background / Conclusion"). "Why the spread game is broken" beats "The Series A problem." Claim-led, not category-led. |
When to run
Long-form articles, essays, whitepapers, or guest posts where the user has a contrarian or non-obvious angle they want to publish. Three human-approval gates (Phase 1 pyramid, Phase 2 prose, Phase 3 polish). Skip for LinkedIn posts (linkedin-content), newsletter copy, or website copy. Triggers, anti-triggers, and pre-flight checklist → the premium reference.
Inputs
| Input | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Topic / core insight | Required | User — must be specific and contrarian |
| Target audience | Required | ICP research or user-specified |
| Core argument | Required | User or collaboratively developed |
| ICP research | Recommended | clients/[client]/icp-behavioural.md |
| Product messaging | Recommended | clients/[client]/product-messaging.md |
| Content strategy | Recommended | Pillars + roadmap |
| Competitor positions | Recommended | Identifies white space |
| Source material, word count, publication context | Optional | LinkedIn 800-1500 / blog 1500-2500 / guest 2000-3500 |
Client CLAUDE.md is auto-loaded — apply its voice/messaging anchors. Full input matrix and pre-flight checklist in the premium reference.
Steps
- Validate inputs — topic specific, audience known, contrarian angle present, user has time for 3 review cycles.
- Phase 1.1 — Clarify core insight. Ask: "What's the one thing you want the reader to believe after reading this that they didn't believe before?"
- Phase 1.2 — Identify audience starting point. Current belief, gap to governing thought, anticipated objections.
- Phase 1.3 — Build the pyramid. Governing Thought → 2-4 Key Line Arguments → Supporting Evidence per key line. Use the template in the premium reference. Pyramid theory + MECE deep-dive in the premium reference.
- Phase 1.4 — Test structure. MECE check (no overlap, fully supports governing thought) + "so what?" test on every level.
- Phase 1 deliverable + STOP. Wrap in the Phase 1 checkpoint format. Wait for explicit "Approved — proceed to Phase 2" before continuing.
- Phase 2.1 — Map pyramid to prose sections. Governing thought → opening, key lines → sections, objections → inline or dedicated, "so what?" → closing.
- Phase 2.2 — Write opening. Hook → Context → Thesis → optional Roadmap. Phase 2.3 — Expand each section: Headline → Lead → Evidence → Transition. Phase 2.4 — Write closing: Restate → Synthesize → Implications → CTA.
- Phase 2 deliverable + STOP. Three title options + full prose outline. Wrap in Phase 2 checkpoint format. Wait for "Approved — proceed to Phase 3".
- Phase 3.1 — Apply TOV. Operator authority, prescriptive confidence, framework-driven clarity, candid partnership, specificity over superlatives, conversational warmth. Em dashes with spaces, sentence case headlines, numerals, banned-word check. Quick checklist → the premium reference.
- Phase 3.2 — ICP guardrails. Would target ICP care? Right sophistication? Would they share this with their team?
- Phase 3.3 — Anti-hallucination guardrails. No invented client names/metrics/quotes. Mark missing data as
[Data point needed]. Verify proof points or flag as[Example — verify before publishing]. - Phase 3.4 — 100 Posts Test. "If I published 100 posts like this, would the aggregate feel authentic to my voice and brand?" Plus final read-aloud check.
- Phase 3 deliverable + final STOP. Wrap as
THOUGHT LEADERSHIP FINAL — PHASE 3with quality report and items-for-review. Wait for "Approved — ready to publish". - Push to chains. After approval, offer LinkedIn teaser, standalone quote pulls, email intro, or newsletter summary. Suggest
/linkedin-content,/email-nurture, or update/content-strategyplan.
Format guidelines per platform → the premium reference. Phase output wrappers, checkpoint dialogues, MECE details, Exa research substrate, and full auto-update protocol → the premium reference.
What good looks like
Examples — examples/worked-example-gtm-engineer.md (full 3-phase walkthrough), examples/top-performing-examples.md (validated patterns).
Evaluations — Governing thought is contrarian and specific (not commodity wisdom). Key lines are MECE. Every claim has verified source or [Example — verify] flag. No banned words: solutions, leverage, synergy, scalable, best-in-class, game-changer, innovative, cutting-edge, very, really, basically, just. Three checkpoints honoured (no skipping ahead). Passes 100 Posts Test. Cites [VERIFIED: exa_search, {url}, accessed {YYYY-MM-DD}] for any external claim per .claude/rules/ontology.md and .claude/rules/exa-protocol.md.
Final ship gate
Run /premortem --output before ship. See /premortem skill for the 5 execution domains (will-it-resonate / will-it-convert / will-it-stay-on-brand / will-stakeholder-push-back / will-it-degrade-over-time) and output template.
Then run /voice-reviewer — the content ship gate: voice + brand quality (pm-loop.md).
Trivial-case escape: ## Premortem\nNo failure modes — trivial change satisfies the contract for genuinely trivial outputs.
Persuasion & stickiness pass
Output complies with persuasion-and-stickiness.md — Cialdini's 7 persuasion levers + Heath's SUCCESs. Deploy the 1-2 Cialdini levers that fit the reader's barrier (never all seven; every lever must be TRUE), run the SUCCESs diagnostic (Simple / Unexpected / Concrete / Credible / Emotional / Stories) over the near-final draft, then the rule's pre-ship gate.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 36
- Forks
- 14
- Last commit
- Jul 2026
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
thought-leadership-matteotitta- Source
- github.com/matteotitta/genesys-skills