compound-writing

Scan or clean prose for AI-generated residue, including unsupported connective tissue, epistemic inflation, over-completed arguments, performed voice, formulaic structure, empty figurative language, stock phrasing, corporate abstraction, hedging, and false enthusiasm. Use for AI-smell cleanup, humanizing model-assisted prose, source-faithful drafting validation, writing polish, or pre-publication checks; enforce silently when composed into drafting or line editing.

Generate analogy options to explain a concept. Invoke with /cw-analogy or /cw-analogy [concept to explain].

Diagnose whether the most important idea in an article, essay, post, memo, section, paragraph, or sentence appears where it best serves the reader. Use for BLUF checks, buried or misplaced ledes, slow or misleading openings, intro drift, competing main ideas, and requests to get to the point or find the real opening. Compare what the opening foregrounds with what the artifact actually delivers, judge whether any delay is earned, and recommend the smallest structural move. Diagnose by default; rewrite only when asked.

Help users surface raw material for a piece when they don't have a specific idea yet. Invoke with /cw-brainstorm or when user says they want to explore ideas.

Run a multi-round deliberation between reviewers. Unlike /cw-panel (which synthesizes), /cw-debate has reviewers respond to each other's arguments across rounds until tensions resolve or reach acknowledged stalemate.

Review a draft for big-picture issues in argument, structure, stakes, evidence, and payoff. Use when a piece needs developmental editing, a top-level diagnosis, or substantial restructuring before sentence polish.

Turn an outline, notes, source material, or partial prose into a complete draft while preserving the writer's voice, thesis ownership, and source provenance. Use when the user asks to draft a piece or section.

Compose existing Compound Writing skills and runtime capabilities for open-ended writing outcomes that no single skill covers, such as cross-draft analysis, source-to-outline comparison, or multi-pass revision.

Run a publication-readiness check on a nearly complete piece and deliver a clear ready, almost-ready, or needs-work verdict. Use when the user asks for a final pass, quality gate, or pre-publication check.

Cuts ruthlessly. Flags every adjective, adverb, and unnecessary word. Demands you kill your darlings.

Reviews for suspense and tension. Where's the bomb under the table? What does the reader know that someone doesn't?

Generate 3 hook options tailored to your content. Invoke with /cw-hook or /cw-hook [topic/context].

Draw out and organize the writer's own thinking without supplying meaning, stakes, or an argument for them. Invoke with /cw-interview or when the user has a specific idea they want to explore before outlining.

Revise prose at the sentence and word level while preserving voice, meaning, source accuracy, and useful weirdness. Use when the structure is stable and the user asks for a line edit, polish, tightening pass, or usable rewrite.

Reads your writing from a loving, supportive, but not-quite-getting-it perspective. Surfaces where you've lost the general reader.

Reads your writing through the meanest, least-charitable lens. Challenges every claim, questions every assumption, pokes holes in the logic. Use for later drafts when you want hard feedback.

Surfaces counterarguments, objections, and "yeah buts" a reader might have to your argument. Helps you anticipate and address resistance before it derails the piece.

Begin or refresh the separate VOICE.md, STYLE.md, and optional AUDIENCE.md guides in a writer's durable writing home from a short conversation, existing writing, or maintained context. Use during first-run writing-home setup and when the user wants to define, calibrate, import, or update voice, style, or audience context.

Organize interview material into a detailed structure using the 10%/30% framework. Invoke with /cw-outline or after completing an interview.

Convene a panel of reviewers to analyze a draft from multiple perspectives, then synthesize their feedback into consensus findings, productive tensions, and prioritized recommendations.