Shape Raw Notes Into an Article — Beta

What it does

This source is explicitly in progress: the publisher excludes it from the normal plugin and says it can change or disappear without warning. It reads the full raw-material file, keeps that file unchanged and writes a separate article. Reader prerequisites are agreed first. Candidate openings imply different theses, and each later block must ground any new concept before relying on it. The user chooses the direction, format choices are discussed and approved blocks are written as the article grows.

When to use it

• Turn interview fragments into an argument without losing the original notes.
• Shape a technical article for readers with a known starting level.
• Compare possible openings before committing to an article’s thesis.

Step-by-step workflow

1. Read the entire source pile and confirm a separate output path.
2. Agree what concepts the intended reader already knows.
3. Offer distinct openings and let the user choose or combine them.
4. Develop and append each agreed block, explaining its purpose and format.
5. Re-read the output before edits and stop when the user considers the article complete.

Example request

Use the beta writing-shape workflow on our notes about warehouse returns. Treat the notes as read-only. Assume the reader knows our Return Batch term but not the overnight-processing constraints. Offer three openings with different arguments before drafting. Build the chosen article one agreed block at a time, name missing evidence and never invent an example to bridge a gap. Save separately; do not publish.

Worked example

A note pile may contain customer anecdotes, operational numbers and a technical proposal. One opening could argue for an overnight pilot; another could focus on why exceptions must be understood first. Choosing the thesis changes the order of evidence. If the selected argument needs a measured staffing example absent from the notes, the workflow asks for it or cuts that section. Before appending a block, re-reading the article protects edits the human may have made between turns.

What you get

A separate evolving article whose structure follows the agreed thesis and the reader’s grounded concepts.

How to evaluate the result

• Verify the source pile remains unchanged.
• Check concepts are introduced before later blocks depend on them.
• Confirm every appended block was agreed and no missing fact was fabricated.

What you need

The complete raw-material file, an engaged editor, an agreed output path and access to the experimental source outside the standard plugin.

Setup and activation

Experimental source: the publisher explicitly excludes in-progress skills from its normal plugin. This guide describes a source review only; no manual installation or execution was performed. The source may change or disappear without notice. Before any later installation, scan the exact source with SkillSpector, review its supporting files and validate the intended client’s file and permission behavior. The publisher documents plugin setup for Claude Code, Codex and Copilot, and manual Agent Skills setup for Gemini CLI and other clients. Choose one distribution method per client to avoid duplicate skills. The engineering collection expects project-specific tracker, triage-label and document-location settings from setup-matt-pocock-skills. Keep referenced companion skills and files available. This catalogue review does not install or run them; scan the exact source before any later installation. Client tools, permissions and subagent support still need separate validation.

Limits and considerations

Beta; excluded from the publisher’s stable plugin and top-level documentation. Installation and client behavior are untested here. The source does not perform new research, edit the raw pile or publish. Its name uses exploit to mean developing existing material, not a security operation.

Related workflows

• Use writing-for-agents for instructions rather than reader-facing articles.
• Use handoff to preserve the chosen thesis between sessions.

License and reuse

MIT at repository level (Copyright 2026 Matt Pocock). Preserve the copyright and permission notice when redistributing substantial source material; inspect any separately licensed dependencies or assets.

Further reading

• Reviewed SKILL.md (immutable commit)
• Publisher README: distributions and compatibility
• Reviewed MIT license
• Publisher beta status and distribution limits