CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

talk-stage4-position

Stage 4 — Strategic angles, titles, descriptions, peer feedback draft. Includes mandatory CHECKPOINT before script can start.

Install with Tessl CLI

npx tessl i github:FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide --skill talk-stage4-position
What are skills?
Invalid
This skill can't be scored yet
Validation errors are blocking scoring. Review and fix them to unlock Quality, Impact and Security scores. See what needs fixing →
SKILL.md
Review
Evals

Talk Stage 4: Position + CHECKPOINT

Generates strategic angles, titles, descriptions, and a peer-feedback draft. Then stops and waits for your angle + title choice before Stage 5 can proceed.

When to Use This Skill

  • After Stage 3 (Concepts) — needs the concept catalogue
  • When deciding how to frame the talk
  • Before sending the CFP (uses the generated descriptions directly)

What This Skill Does

  1. Reads inputs — summary + concepts + event constraints
  2. Generates angles — 3-4 distinct angles with force/weakness analysis
  3. Recommends — one clear choice with structured justification
  4. Generates titles — 3-5 options per angle
  5. Generates descriptions — short abstract + long CFP description
  6. Generates feedback draft — ready-to-send message (3 formats)
  7. CHECKPOINT — displays choice request and waits for user response
  8. Saves 4 files

Input

  • talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-summary.md (required)
  • talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-concepts.md (required)
  • Event constraints: duration, audience, CFP format if applicable

Output

  • talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-angles.md
  • talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-titre.md
  • talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-descriptions.md
  • talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-feedback-draft.md

angles.md Format

# Talk Angles — {provisional title}

**Goal**: Choose the angle that maximizes impact for {audience}.
**Audience**: {audience description}

---

## Angle 1: {Angle name}

**Pitch**: {2-3 sentences describing the talk from this angle}

**Strengths**:
- {strength 1}
- {strength 2}

**Weaknesses**:
- {weakness 1}
- {weakness 2}

**Audience fit**: Strong / Medium / Weak — {short justification}

**Verdict**: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (out of 5)

---

[Angle 2, Angle 3, (optional Angle 4) — same structure]

---

## Recommendation: Angle {X}, enriched by the others

**Angle {X} is the right choice.** Here's why:

### 1. It's the only angle that integrates the others
[Structure showing how other angles feed into the main one]

### 2. The narrative arc is natural and compelling
[Why the story holds better with this angle]

### 3. The metrics lend credibility throughout
[Which metrics support this angle most]

### 4. The final message emerges naturally
[How the conclusion flows from this angle]

---

## Recommended structure with sub-angles

| Act | Duration | Main angle | Integrated sub-angle |
|-----|----------|-----------|---------------------|
| 1. {name} | {n} min | {main angle} | {sub-angle} |
...

titre.md Format

# Titles — Talk {slug}

**Selected angle**: Angle {X} — {name}
**Constraints**: {duration} min | {audience}

---

## Titles for the recommended angle

### Option 1 (recommended)
**{Main title}**
*Optional subtitle: {subtitle}*

Strengths: {why this title works}
Audience appeal: {who it hooks}

### Option 2
**{Title}**
Strengths: {strengths}

[Options 3-5]

---

## Titles for alternative angles (backup)

### If Angle 2 chosen
- **{title}**
- **{title}**

[If Angle 3 chosen — same]

---

## Verdict

**Recommendation**: Option 1 — "{title}"
**Why**: {short justification}

descriptions.md Format

# Descriptions — Talk {slug}

---

## Short description (abstract, ~100 words)

{Full text — direct, engaging, starts with the impact or concrete promise.
Not "In this talk, we will..."}

---

## Long description (CFP, ~250 words)

{Full text — context, what the audience will learn, who it's for.
Includes key metrics if available.
Direct and factual tone.}

---

## Speaker pitch (bio-ready, ~50 words)

{Speaker introduction in 1-2 sentences, their relationship to the topic}

---

## Tags / Keywords

{5-10 relevant tags for CFP or search}

CHECKPOINT (mandatory — Step 7)

After generating and saving the 4 files, display:

---
CHECKPOINT: Angle + Title choice

I've generated 4 files:
- talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-angles.md    → {n} angles analyzed
- talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-titre.md     → {n} title options
- talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-descriptions.md
- talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-feedback-draft.md

Before starting the script (Stage 5), I need your choice:

1. Which angle do you choose? (recommended: Angle {X} — {name})
2. Which title do you prefer? (recommended: "{title}")

You can also modify, combine, or propose something different.
Reply to start the script.
---

Do not invoke Stage 5 without explicit user confirmation.

Angle Generation Rules

  • Minimum 3 angles, maximum 4 (beyond that it's noise)
  • Each angle must be genuinely distinct (not variations of the same)
  • The recommendation must be clear and argued — not "your choice"
  • Always test: "can this angle sustain the full duration without repeating?"

Anti-patterns

  • Click-bait titles ("What nobody tells you about AI")
  • Recommending the last angle listed by default (recency bias)
  • Descriptions that read like slide summaries
  • Skipping the CHECKPOINT — it's the pipeline's most important control point
  • Marketing language in descriptions (revolutionary, game-changer)

Validation Checklist

  • 3-4 angles with force/weakness/audience-fit analysis
  • Clear recommendation with structured justification
  • 3-5 titles for the recommended angle
  • Short description (~100 words) and long description (~250 words)
  • Feedback draft generated from template
  • CHECKPOINT displayed clearly
  • 4 files saved

Tips

  • Send feedback-draft.md to a peer before the checkpoint — 10 minutes of external feedback can save hours of rework on the script
  • The recommendation is a starting point, not an order — your audience knowledge overrides any algorithmic suggestion
  • Weak titles are usually too abstract: test each title by asking "would someone in the hallway stop walking to read this?"

Templates

  • Peer feedback formats: templates/feedback-draft.md

Related

Repository
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide
Last updated
Created

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.