について
このスキルは、AIコンテンツエージェント向けの編集パイプラインを構築し、6つの異なる役割に契約を結ばせることで、単一のコンテンツを多様で高品質なアセットへと変換します。構造化されたワークフローを経て記録を確認可能にすることで、一般的な表現、重複、または出典不明の出力を修正するように設計されています。エージェント運用のコンテンツチームを構築する場合や、1つの基幹コンテンツから1週間分の独自性のある論拠に基づく配信素材を生成する必要がある場合にご利用ください。
クイックインストール
Claude Code
推奨npx skills add JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skillsgit clone https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills.git ~/.claude/skills/suede-newsroomこのコマンドをClaude Codeにコピー&ペーストしてスキルをインストールします
ドキュメント
Suede Newsroom
Six chatbots pointed at the same brand are not a content team. A newsroom is the loop that connects them, and every arrow in it is a handoff with a contract:
idea -> research -> angle -> flagship -> distribution -> review -> performance -> playbooks
Break one arrow and the failure is predictable, not mysterious:
| Broken arrow | What ships instead |
|---|---|
| research never reaches the strategist | a generic angle any competitor could have written |
| the writer never sees the evidence packet | claims that drift one step past what the source says |
| distribution starts from the finished draft | five surfaces carrying the same shortened article |
| performance never reaches the playbooks | the same mistake repeated at a higher cadence |
This skill owns the pipeline: who decides what, what travels between them, and
how one idea becomes several assets that argue different things. Read
.agents/product-marketing.md first if it exists — it holds product, audience,
positioning, and proof, and nothing here restates it.
Step 1 — Put the campaign in a file, not a conversation
One record per campaign at .agents/newsroom/<slug>.md. It is the only thing
that has to survive between roles, sessions, and restarts.
A conversation between roles has two failure modes a file does not: context dies on restart, and the next role has to infer which sentences were load-bearing. The record gives each role a predictable input and lets a human audit a campaign without reopening six sessions.
Keep it narrow — decisions and the evidence behind them. Drafts live beside it, not in it. The template and per-stage completion rules are in references/campaign-record.md.
Step 2 — Give each role one decision to own
The fastest way to ruin a multi-agent content team is to hand every role the same instruction: make great content. Each role gets one decision, one artifact, and a named point where it stops.
| Role | Owns | Returns | Hands to |
|---|---|---|---|
| Signal scout | whether an idea has a reason to exist now | scored candidates | researcher |
| Researcher | what is verified versus inferred | evidence packet | strategist |
| Strategist | the single editorial angle | angle brief | writer |
| Writer | the deepest version of the idea | flagship piece | distribution |
| Distribution | what each surface argues | asset set with entryways | editor |
| Editor | whether the package holds together | approve, revise, or reject | human |
Every contract fills five fields — owns, reads, returns, must
not, done when. Full text for all six, with the must not and done when
clauses, is in references/role-contracts.md. Copy
them in verbatim; a paraphrased must not is how a writer starts picking angles.
Thresholds that make the contracts checkable:
- Scout returns at most three candidates, each with a decay window, and names a rejection reason for every candidate it discarded. A run that approves everything it found did not filter anything.
- Researcher returns three to seven verified claims, a URL for every claim with
consequence, and an explicit
what the sources do not provelist. - Strategist returns exactly one recommended angle plus at least two named rejected directions and why each is weaker. A menu pushes the decision back to the human, which is the decision this role exists to make.
- Distribution returns one entryway per asset and no entryway twice.
- Editor reviews the assets together in one pass, never one at a time.
Step 3 — Gate every handoff
A stage is complete when every field it owns is filled and readable by the next role — not drafted, not discussed. Written into the record.
Return-to-sender. When a field the current stage needs is empty, the role sends the record back and names the field. It does not fill the gap with a plausible assumption. A pipeline whose roles patch each other's gaps produces confident output with no traceable source, which is worse than a stalled campaign because nothing signals the problem.
Halt format. Stop. Name the empty field and the stage that owns it in one line. Offer the human these options and wait: (1) supply the field now, (2) send the record back one stage for another attempt, (3) narrow the campaign until the field is unnecessary, or (4) kill it. Do not advance the record, and do not present a partial package as complete.
Two returns on the same field means the pipeline cannot supply it. Escalate rather than attempting a third pass — a third attempt on the same gap is where fabrication starts.
Step 4 — Distribute by argument, not by format
This is the stage that fails most often, and it fails quietly.
An article does not become a short post by losing 1,500 words, and a newsletter does not become a carousel because its paragraphs were laid onto slides. Both moves produce assets carrying the same argument at different lengths — which is why a week of them reads like one post repeated.
Work from the angle brief, not the finished draft. A draft carries one argument, so anything derived from it inherits that argument. Reading the draft first is the mechanism that produces shortened articles.
Assign one entryway per asset
| Entryway | The argument it makes | Needs |
|---|---|---|
| Proof | this is real, and here is the artifact | something a stranger can check |
| Mechanism | here is why it works | a causal chain, not a description |
| Workflow | you can run this today | ordered steps someone could follow |
| Risk | here is what breaks, and when | a named failure mode with its trigger |
| Result | here is what it produced | an outcome plus its conditions |
| Critique | the common approach is worse than it looks | the real default, and how it fails |
| Compression | here is the whole shape | the idea reduced to one line or image |
One entryway per asset. An asset carrying two is a shortened article wearing a label. An entryway the source cannot supply is unavailable — report it and say what evidence would unlock it, rather than inventing an artifact to fill it.
Worked examples, surface fit, and the failure mode each entryway falls into are in references/entryways.md.
Score each asset for standing alone
Three checks, one point each, run against the whole set:
| Check | Passes when |
|---|---|
| New information | it carries a claim, step, number, or object no other asset carries |
| Second reader | someone who already read the flagship still gets something; "more at the link" is not something |
| Removal | deleting it costs the campaign a specific, nameable thing |
3 ships. 2 goes back for revision, naming the failed check. 0–1 gets cut, and say what the set loses — usually nothing.
Run the collision gate
Reduce each asset to one sentence first; comparing full drafts hides collisions.
- Claim collision — two assets whose central claim is the same sentence.
- Opening collision — the same story, statistic, or line opens two assets. The most common, and the most visible to anyone following on two surfaces.
- Entryway collision — the same entryway used twice.
Halt format. Stop. Name the two assets, the collision type, and the shared sentence. Offer: (1) reassign one to an unused entryway, (2) cut the weaker and say what the set loses, or (3) record it as a deliberate repeat with a reason. Wait. Do not resolve a collision by rewording — the claim underneath is what collides.
Fewer surfaces than entryways is normal. Three assets with three distinct entryways beats seven assets with two.
Step 5 — Keep the human at the editorial boundary
The first version prepares everything and publishes nothing. The human approves the angle, the flagship draft, every consequential factual claim, every public post, any change to voice or offer, and any performance lesson before it becomes a standing rule.
Each approval and rejection is a labelled example of the human's judgment. When the same decision comes back the same way three campaigns running, move it into the editor's review rules so it is applied before the human sees the package.
Move publishing authority only when both hold: the queue has produced no revisions for three consecutive campaigns, and a wrong post is recoverable by deleting it. Autonomy should remove repeated decisions, not remove taste.
Step 6 — Make performance rewrite the playbooks
Reporting numbers is not learning. After each campaign log the signal, angle, entryway, surface, reach, meaningful engagement, and the goal-linked action. Then have the editor return three lists:
| List | Bar to qualify |
|---|---|
| Keep | held across two or more campaigns and still matches strategy |
| Test | one promising result — a hypothesis, run it again |
| Stop | failed twice, duplicated another asset, or cost more than it returned |
Every proposal names the campaigns supporting it. One strong result is a Test, never a Keep. The human approves before any rule changes. Without this arrow, every campaign starts from the same generic prompt forever.
Log by entryway, not only by surface — over a few campaigns that reveals which door the audience actually walks through, which is more useful than which platform performed.
Running it on the host you have
Six roles is the model, not a hosting requirement.
| Host | Roles map to | What breaks |
|---|---|---|
| One session | one pass per role, record reread between | role bleed — it edits its own draft |
| Subagents | one per role, dispatched in stage order | cost, if each drags full context |
| Separate profiles | one per role, isolated memory | drift, if they coordinate by chat |
| One person | one sitting per role, in order | nothing; this is the honest first week |
Two rules survive every host. Conversation coordinates; files carry state. And isolate role memory where the host allows it — one shared memory turns six specialists back into one generalist that has read everything and distinguishes nothing.
Start smaller than six roles
Stand up scout, researcher, and editor first, and run three real ideas through them. Add the strategist once two of three evidence packets need no rework, the writer once the briefs constrain a draft without further questions, and distribution once one flagship has shipped and been measured.
The first useful version returns one researched opportunity, one angle brief, and one approval-ready post with a source attached. That is already more than most content operations produce.
Anti-patterns
- One shared memory for all six roles — specialists collapse into one generalist with opinions about everything.
- Prose handoffs — the next role guesses which sentences were load-bearing.
- Roles that fill each other's gaps — confident output, no traceable source.
- Splitting the draft instead of the argument — produces length variants.
- One hook rewritten seven ways — the claim underneath is identical, so the reader sees the repeat even when the wording differs.
- Adding the writer first — the most visible role, and the one that produces least value without an evidence packet in front of it.
- A performance log nobody converts to rules — analytics theatre.
Banned vocabulary
Avoid "fully autonomous media company", "content on autopilot", "replaces a marketing team", "repurpose", "atomize", and "one piece into fifty posts". The first three hide the approval steps; the last three describe reformatting, and naming the work that way produces the work. Say which argument each asset makes.
Boundaries
- Do not publish, schedule, or send anything. The pipeline prepares packages; the human releases them.
- Do not record a claim without the source that supports it, and do not upgrade an inference to a verified claim at any stage.
- Do not introduce a claim, number, or quote during distribution that the evidence packet does not carry.
- Do not invent a proof object, result, or failure mode to fill an entryway the source does not support. Report the entryway as unavailable.
- Do not present an unscored asset set as ready, and do not resolve a collision by rewording rather than reassigning.
- Do not report a stage complete without the record fields that stage owns being filled, and do not fabricate reach or engagement. An unmeasured campaign is logged as unmeasured.
Routing
- Which topics, pillars, or clusters the pipeline should work on -> use
suede-content-strategy. That skill decides what it operates on; this one decides how it moves. - Platform mix, cadence, calendars, listening, and pulling atoms out of long-form
-> use
suede-social. Instagram-specific programs -> usesuede-instagram-growth. - Cadence, state, idempotency, and stop conditions for a scheduled stage -> use
suede-marketing-loops. - Writing the flagship for a high-stakes public surface -> use
suede-ship-copy. A single shorter surface -> usesuede-copy. - A video moment bridged to one long-form guide -> use
suede-clip-to-guide. - Stripping AI writing patterns from the drafted assets -> use
suede-deslop. - Measurement plumbing behind the performance log -> use
suede-analytics. - Paid variants of these angles -> use
suede-ad-creative. - Agents editing code in parallel with file ownership and rollback -> use
suede-agent-teams. This skill covers editorial lanes, not repository lanes. - From
suede-content-strategyandsuede-social: route role contracts, the handoff record, and entryway assignment back here.
GitHub リポジトリ
よくある質問
suede-newsroom Skillとは何ですか?
suede-newsroom はJasonColapietro が作成した Claude Skillです。Skillは、Claudeが必要に応じて読み込む指示とリソースをまとめ、追加の指示なしで suede-newsroom に関連するタスクを実行できるようにします。
suede-newsroom をインストールするには?
このページのインストールコマンドを使用してください。suede-newsroom をプラグインとして Claude Code に追加するか、リポジトリを skills ディレクトリにクローンし、Claudeを再起動してSkillを読み込みます。
suede-newsroom はどのカテゴリに属しますか?
suede-newsroom は メタ カテゴリに属します。
suede-newsroom は無料で利用できますか?
はい。suede-newsroom は AIMCP に掲載されており、無料でインストールできます。
関連スキル
このスキルは、Content Collections(Markdown/MDXファイルを型安全なデータコレクションに変換するTypeScriptファーストのツール)の本番環境でテストされた設定を提供します。Zodバリデーションによる型安全性を実現し、ブログ、ドキュメントサイト、コンテンツ重視のVite + Reactアプリケーション構築時にご利用ください。Viteプラグインの設定、MDXコンパイルから、デプロイ最適化、スキーマバリデーションまで、すべてを網羅しています。
このスキルは、開発者がPolymarket予測市場プラットフォームを活用したアプリケーション構築を可能にします。API統合による取引や市場データの取得に加え、WebSocketを介したリアルタイムデータストリーミングにより、ライブ取引や市場活動を監視できます。取引戦略の実装や、ライブ市場更新を処理するツールの作成にご利用ください。
このスキルは、開発者がコマンド、ファイル、LSP操作など25種類以上のイベントタイプにフックするOpenCodeプラグインを作成することを支援します。JavaScript/TypeScriptモジュール向けに、プラグイン構造、イベントAPI仕様、および実装パターンを提供します。カスタムイベント駆動ロジックでOpenCode AIアシスタントのライフサイクルをインターセプト、監視、または拡張する必要がある場合にご利用ください。
SGLangは、高性能なLLMサービングフレームワークであり、RadixAttentionプレフィックスキャッシュを活用したJSON、正規表現、エージェントワークフロー向けの高速で構造化された生成を特長とします。特にプレフィックスが繰り返されるタスクにおいて、大幅に高速な推論を実現し、複雑な構造化出力やマルチターン対話に最適です。制約付きデコードが必要な場合や、広範なプレフィックス共有を伴うアプリケーションを構築する場合は、vLLMなどの代替案ではなくSGLangを選択してください。
