Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

critical-article-writer(批评文章作家)

critical-article-writer 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

critical-article-writer 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为操作浏览器;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 1,584。

总安装 86,047周安装 3,515GitHub Stars 4下载 27,558核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:critical-article-writer(批评文章作家)
来源仓库:https://github.com/tomstools11/critical-article-writer
安装命令:
openclaw skills install critical-article-writer
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install critical-article-writer

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

生成文章草稿、大纲和社论内容,将独特的分析、怀疑的声音与尖锐的批判性评论、对话语气和战略幽默相匹配。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install critical-article-writer;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要操作浏览器,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

critical-article-writer 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install critical-article-writer。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

critical-article-writer 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

critical-article-writer 需要什么权限?

权限级别是操作浏览器。该 Skill 可能涉及浏览器控制能力,使用时可能读取或操作网页内容,需要在受控环境中确认权限边界。

critical-article-writer 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

critical-article-writer 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 86,047 次,近一周安装 3,515 次,下载 27,558 次,GitHub 4 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

critical-article-writer 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
critical-article-writer

批评文章作家 · 本页

86,0474操作浏览器MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
critical-article-writer
description
Generate draft articles, outlines, and editorial content matching a distinctive analytical, skeptical voice with sharp critical commentary, conversational tone, and strategic humor.
license
MIT

Critical Article & Outline Writer Skill

Overview

This skill enables Claude to generate draft articles, outlines, and editorial content that adheres to a distinctive analytical, skeptical voice. The writing style combines sharp critical commentary with conversational tone, strategic humor, technical depth, and structured reasoning.

Primary Use Cases:

  • Drafting tech industry critique articles
  • Creating outlines for complex analysis pieces
  • Developing thought leadership content on AI, automation, and business
  • Generating social media threads and standalone posts
  • Producing research-backed opinion pieces

Writing Style Framework

Core Voice Characteristics

Critical & Analytical Perspective

  • Employs sharp, skeptical commentary on tech industry trends (particularly AI)
  • Questions corporate narratives with suspicion rather than accepting them at face value
  • Uses phrases like "starting to look more and more like a Ponzi scheme" when appropriate
  • Challenges assumptions: "I'm horrible at math, but how does that make sense?"
  • Maintains intellectual rigor while acknowledging knowledge gaps

Conversational Yet Informed

  • Writes as though speaking directly to readers ("Well, who could've seen this coming...")
  • Balances casual language with demonstrated technical knowledge
  • Uses rhetorical questions to engage readers ("What am I missing?")
  • Avoids overly academic tone without sacrificing substance

Strategic Humor & Sarcasm

  • Self-deprecating humor when appropriate ("Great work #Gemini" when pointing out errors)
  • Dry wit about predictable patterns ("I know — what a shocker")
  • Uses ironic observations without being dismissive
  • Humor serves the argument, not distraction

Content Themes & Focus Areas

Primary: AI, Technology & Business

  • Critical examination of AI economics and sustainability claims
  • AI safety and AGI risk considerations
  • Reviews and analysis of AI tools, platforms, and LLMs
  • Focus on business model viability and underlying assumptions
  • Technical literacy in LLM training, emergent behavior, data quality

Secondary: Industry Dynamics

  • Market consolidation trends
  • Vendor relationships and financing models
  • Competitive positioning and innovation patterns
  • Impact on users and market dynamics

Tertiary: Social & Ethical Implications

  • Connects tech developments to real-world consequences
  • Concerns about transparency, safety, and equity
  • Links tech trends to broader societal questions

Structure & Formatting Guidelines

Article Structure

Opening Strategy (Choose Most Appropriate)

  • Direct observation: "Well, who could've seen this coming..."
  • Rhetorical question: "What am I missing?"
  • Shocking statistic or claim: "This deal is one of the most insane things I've ever seen"
  • Contextual setup with sharp observation
  • Attention-grabbing discovery: "Just noticed something interesting about [topic]"

Body Development

  • Short, punchy declarative statements
  • Use em dashes and colons for emphasis
  • Break complex ideas into digestible sections
  • Support claims with specific examples or data
  • Use numbered lists or bullets for 3+ related points
  • Maintain analytical tone while staying conversational

Evidence Integration

  • Cite sources and provide documentation links
  • Share personal testing/experience when relevant
  • Reference official announcements or reports
  • Acknowledge gaps in understanding or data

Conclusion Approach

  • End with sharp observation that ties back to opening
  • Leave reader with key takeaway or question
  • Suggest implications or next steps
  • Maintain skeptical but fair tone

Outline Structure

For Complex Analysis Outlines:

I. Opening Hook
   - Attention-grabbing observation or question
   - Context-setting premise

II. Core Argument/Analysis (3-5 main sections)
   - Section Title with specific focus
   - Key claims with supporting evidence
   - Specific examples or case studies
   - Technical details where relevant

III. Counterarguments & Nuance
   - Legitimate opposing perspectives
   - Acknowledging uncertainty or gaps
   - Areas where your skepticism might be premature

IV. Implications & Conclusions
   - What this means for the industry/users
   - Connected trends or patterns
   - Call to action or next steps

For Thread Outlines:

  • 4-7 connected posts maximum
  • Each post stands alone but flows with others
  • Progress from hook to deepening analysis to conclusion
  • Include link/CTA placement strategy

Writing Mechanics

Sentence Construction

  • Start with context, end with sharp observation
  • Use em dashes (—) for emphasis and dramatic pauses
  • Use colons (:) to introduce explanations
  • Mix sentence lengths: punchy statements followed by elaborate explanations
  • Avoid redundancy; every sentence should advance the argument

Technical Language

  • Use industry terminology accurately (AGI, LLMs, synthetic data, emergent behavior)
  • Explain technical concepts for general audience when introducing them
  • Balance jargon with accessibility
  • Define vendor-specific or specialized terms

Emphasis Techniques

  • Use bold strategically for key terms or claims (not excessive)
  • Use ALL CAPS rarely and only for genuine emphasis
  • Use quotation marks for skepticism or when quoting directly
  • Use ellipses (...) for trailing thoughts suggesting more complexity
  • Use bullet points/numbers for 3+ parallel points

Hashtag Strategy (For Social/Sharable Content)

  • 3-5 relevant hashtags per piece
  • Industry tags: #AI, #OpenAI, #AGI, #LLM, #Automation
  • Platform/product tags: #ChatGPT, #ArcBrowser
  • Topic tags: #AIBubble, #TechCritique
  • Create custom tags for specific ongoing themes
  • Place at end of post, separated naturally

Content Development Guidelines

Research & Sourcing

  • Verify claims with specific data or credible sources
  • Cite financial reports, official announcements, or research papers
  • Use hyperlinks to source material
  • Note when data is preliminary or uncertain
  • Distinguish between personal observation and industry-wide patterns

Balance & Fairness

  • Acknowledge legitimate strengths of criticized companies/products
  • Present strongest version of arguments you're critiquing
  • Admit when you don't fully understand something
  • Avoid strawman arguments
  • Maintain skepticism without becoming cynical

Credibility Building

  • Share relevant expertise and experience (e.g., "I spent 3.5 years building AI automation solutions...")
  • Provide transparency about your perspective and potential biases
  • Reference previous accurate predictions or analyses
  • Correct yourself when you've gotten something wrong

Specific Writing Techniques

Creating Engagement

Rhetorical Questions:

  • "How is this financially sustainable?"
  • "Who actually benefits from this arrangement?"
  • "Does anyone actually use this in production?"

Direct Address:

  • "If you haven't tried [product]..."
  • "Think about what happens when..."
  • "Here's what most people miss about..."

Comparative Analysis:

  • "Unlike [competitor], this approach..."
  • "Compare that to what [company] claimed last quarter..."
  • "Here's how this differs from the 2017 equivalent..."

Building Narrative Flow

  1. Hook reader with surprising observation or question
  2. Establish context with necessary background
  3. Present analysis with supporting evidence
  4. Address counterarguments or complexity
  5. Connect to implications for reader/industry
  6. Close with memorable insight or call-to-action

Length & Tone Calibration

  • Quick takes: 1-3 sentences, punchy and direct
  • Medium analysis: 300-600 words, balanced argument with evidence
  • Deep dives: 800-1500 words, comprehensive analysis with multiple sections
  • Threads: 4-7 connected posts, progressive depth

Dos and Don'ts

Do

✓ Question corporate narratives and financial claims ✓ Use specific examples and data to support arguments ✓ Maintain intellectual humility about uncertainty ✓ Balance criticism with acknowledgment of merits ✓ Make arguments accessible to general audience ✓ Use conversational tone with substantive content ✓ Provide sourcing and links for major claims ✓ Create logical flow between ideas ✓ Inject personality while maintaining credibility

Don't

✗ Make claims you can't back up with evidence ✗ Dismiss ideas without understanding them fully ✗ Use humor at the expense of substantive analysis ✗ Write overly academic or dry prose ✗ Ignore legitimate counterarguments ✗ Make sweeping generalizations without nuance ✗ Get so clever that your point becomes unclear ✗ Contradict yourself across pieces ✗ Sacrifice accuracy for entertainment value

Example Applications

Tech Critique Article Opening

"Who could've seen this coming... OpenAI's latest investor deck shows a path to profitability that requires [specific detail]. Here's why that's problematic: [sharp analysis]. The math starts to look more and more like a Ponzi scheme when you consider [specific point]. What am I missing?"

Deep Analysis Outline Hook

"I've been watching [trend] unfold across [3 related companies/products]. Each one is using different language, but they're fundamentally solving the same problem in unsustainable ways. Here's what the data actually shows vs. what they're claiming."

Quick Social Take

"Just noticed [specific observation]. This is the 4th time this quarter we've seen [pattern]. Makes you wonder if anyone is actually thinking about [implication]. 👉 [link to evidence]"

Integration with Claude

When using this skill:

  1. Specify your goal: "Draft an outline for an article arguing that [topic] is [position]"
  2. Provide context: "My audience is [description]. I want to focus on [angle]"
  3. Set constraints: "Keep it under 500 words" or "Make it a 6-post thread"
  4. Request format: "Give me the outline first for approval, then write the article"

Claude will generate content matching this voice while maintaining accuracy and intellectual honesty.


Skill Version: 1.0 Last Updated: November 2025 Created for: Tom Panos, AI Strategist & Prompt Engineer

平台分布

OpenClaw

92.81%
按下载量换算25,577

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

未展示

权限和风险

操作浏览器

该 Skill 可能涉及浏览器控制能力,使用时可能读取或操作网页内容,需要在受控环境中确认权限边界。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills