Analyzes short articles and drafts to identify specific expansion opportunities — gaps in detail, context, or evidence — with suggested additions without fabricating content. Useful when a piece is under word count or feels rushed, especially with supplied source material.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/autopunk-media-skills:text-expanderThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Identifies where a short article or passage is thin on detail, context, or evidence, and flags specific expansion opportunities with suggested additions — without fabricating information the writer did not provide.
Identifies where a short article or passage is thin on detail, context, or evidence, and flags specific expansion opportunities with suggested additions — without fabricating information the writer did not provide.
Required: The text to be expanded; the target word count or the approximate number of words to add.
Optional: Additional material to integrate (unused quotes, background research, statistics, anecdotes); specific sections the editor wants developed ("expand the third paragraph with more context"); the publication type (news brief, feature, analysis) — this affects where expansion is most appropriate.
Diagnoses the thinness. Reads the draft and identifies where it is underdeveloped: claims without evidence, transitions that skip steps, sources mentioned but not quoted, context assumed but not provided, and conclusions that arrive too quickly. Produces a gap analysis before expanding.
Proposes expansion points. For each gap, specifies what kind of material would strengthen the passage: a supporting example, a statistic, a quote, historical context, a counterpoint, or a transitional paragraph. If the user provided additional material, maps it to the appropriate gaps.
Expands with provided material only. When additional notes, quotes, or data are supplied, integrates them into the draft at the identified expansion points. Matches the existing voice, register, and sentence rhythm. Does not invent facts, quotes, or statistics — if no additional material is available for a gap, flags it as "needs reporting" rather than filling it with fabricated content.
Marks what was added. Delivers the expanded text with new material clearly indicated — either through inline markers or a change log — so the writer can see exactly what was added and verify it before publication.
Two parts. First: a gap analysis listing 3-6 expansion opportunities, each with a location, the type of material needed, and whether the user's supplied material covers it. Second: the expanded text with new material marked in bold so the writer can review additions at a glance. Word counts (original and expanded) stated at the top. If the target cannot be reached with the material provided, states how many additional words of reported content are still needed.
**Original:** [X] words → **Expanded:** [Y] words ([Z] words added)
**Target:** [T] words — [Reached / Needs approximately N more words of reported content]
**Gap Analysis**
1. [Location]: [What is missing] — [Covered by supplied material / Needs reporting]
2. [Location]: [What is missing] — [Covered by supplied material / Needs reporting]
---
[Expanded text with **new material in bold**]
Target: Expand to approximately 350 words Additional material: Quote from a transport analyst: "The problem is not that cities lack cycling infrastructure — it's that the infrastructure they build is designed for confident cyclists, not for the nervous majority who would ride if they felt safe." Text (180 words):
Cities across the region are investing heavily in cycling infrastructure, but ridership numbers remain stubbornly flat. Despite new bike lanes, expanded docking stations, and public awareness campaigns, the percentage of commuters who cycle to work has barely moved in three years.
Transport officials point to several factors: weather, the perception that cycling is dangerous, and the last-mile problem — most people live too far from their workplace to cycle the entire distance. Some officials also acknowledge that infrastructure alone may not be enough to change behaviour that has been shaped by decades of car-centric urban planning.
Original: 180 words → Expanded: 342 words (162 words added) Target: 350 words — Reached (within 2%)
Gap Analysis
Cities across the region are investing heavily in cycling infrastructure, but ridership numbers remain stubbornly flat. Despite new bike lanes, expanded docking stations, and public awareness campaigns, the percentage of commuters who cycle to work has barely moved in three years. The gap between spending and results has prompted a growing debate among planners about whether the current approach to cycling infrastructure is fundamentally misconceived.
Transport officials point to several factors: weather, the perception that cycling is dangerous, and the last-mile problem — most people live too far from their workplace to cycle the entire distance. But some analysts argue the issue runs deeper than logistics. "The problem is not that cities lack cycling infrastructure — it's that the infrastructure they build is designed for confident cyclists, not for the nervous majority who would ride if they felt safe," said one regional transport analyst. The distinction matters: protected lanes separated from traffic by physical barriers attract a broader range of riders than painted lanes on busy roads, but they cost significantly more and require reallocating road space from cars — a move most city councils have been reluctant to make.
Some officials also acknowledge that infrastructure alone may not be enough to change behaviour that has been shaped by decades of car-centric urban planning. How cities address that deeper challenge — through zoning reform, school-route planning, or employer incentives — may determine whether the current investment translates into ridership or remains an expensive symbol of good intentions.
npx claudepluginhub ur-grue/autopunk-media-skills --plugin autopunk-media-skillsScans drafts for repeated ideas, redundant phrases, and unnecessary word clusters, then delivers a flagged report and a tightened version without altering meaning or voice.
Structurally edits article drafts through an interactive section-by-section rewrite for clarity, flow, and argument strength.
Restructures and rewrites article sections for clarity, coherence, and flow. Useful for editing or revising drafts.