Talk Stage 4: Position

VerifiedSafe

Generates 3-4 strategic talk angles with analysis, titles, CFP descriptions, and feedback draft, then enforces a checkpoint for user confirmation.

Sby Skills Guide Bot
ContentIntermediate
7/28/2026
Claude Code
#public-speaking#cfp#talk-writing#storytelling#conference

Recommended for

Automated summary

Generates 3-4 strategic talk angles with strength/weakness analysis, titles, CFP descriptions and a peer feedback draft, then halts at a mandatory checkpoint for user confirmation before scripting.

Strengths

  • Delivers a complete package across four files: angles, titles, descriptions and a feedback draft
  • Scores each angle on strengths, weaknesses, audience fit and an overall star verdict
  • Gives a justified recommendation that folds secondary angles into the main one as sub-angles in an act-by-act structure
  • Enforces an explicit stop point so the angle and title are chosen before the scripting stage begins

Limitations

  • Relies on the summary and concepts files produced by earlier pipeline stages
  • Requires event constraints (duration, audience, CFP format) to be useful
  • Template examples are English-oriented, so francophone talks may need adaptation
When to use it

Use it when you need to decide how to frame a talk and simultaneously produce titles and CFP-ready descriptions.

When not to use it

Skip it if the upstream summary and concept catalogue don't exist yet, or if you want a finished script without an intermediate confirmation step.

Security analysis

Safe
Quality score92/100

The skill only reads and writes markdown files and asks the user questions via AskUserQuestion. It does not execute shell commands, network requests, or destructive actions. No exfiltration, obfuscation, or safety-bypass instructions are present.

No concerns found

How this analysis is made

Examples

Choose a talk angle
Read talks/2025-refactoring-summary.md and talks/2025-refactoring-concepts.md, generate 3 talk angles with strengths and weaknesses, recommend one, then produce titles and CFP descriptions and stop at the checkpoint for my choice. The event is a 30-minute slot for backend engineers.
Prepare a CFP submission
Using the existing summary and concepts for my talk, draft a short abstract, a 250-word CFP description and a speaker pitch, then give me title options for the recommended angle.
Draft a feedback request
Generate the angles and titles for my talk, then write a ready-to-send peer feedback message in three formats so I can ask a colleague to review the framing before I submit the CFP.

name: talk-stage4-position description: "Generates 3-4 strategic talk angles with strength/weakness analysis, title options, CFP descriptions, and a peer feedback draft, then enforces a mandatory CHECKPOINT for user confirmation before scripting. Use when deciding how to frame a talk, preparing a CFP submission, or choosing between multiple narrative angles." allowed-tools: Write Read AskUserQuestion effort: high

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), which provides 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 strength/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 stars)

---

[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 structure]

---

## 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, etc.)

Validation Checklist

  • [ ] 3-4 angles with strength/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

Related

From the file to a first result

The download contains exactly the content displayed on this page. This copy may differ from the latest version in the source repository.

View the source and supporting files

This download contains SKILL.md only. Any scripts, references, templates and dependencies are not included. Get the required files from the source, preserving their directory structure, before continuing.

1. Download the file

Download SKILL.md

From the root of a test project, save the file as .skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/SKILL.md, or use the command below. This folder is for inspecting the skill before installation.

Command for macOS/Linux or WSL: requires a POSIX shell and curl. On Windows without WSL, use the download button and create the folder manually.

mkdir -p '.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24' && curl --fail --show-error --location 'https://skills-guides.com/api/skills/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/download' --output '.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/SKILL.md.part' && mv '.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/SKILL.md.part' '.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/SKILL.md'

2. Check prerequisites

Read SKILL.md before using it. If it references scripts or external services, inspect them and prepare the required access in your test environment.

Tools declared by the author (check availability in your agent): Write Read AskUserQuestion

No recognized prerequisites section in this file. This does not mean it is self-contained: libraries, tools and access requirements may be mentioned elsewhere in the content or source repository.

The platforms on this page are catalog indications. The paths below follow tool documentation; they do not prove this skill has been run in those tools. No minimum tool version is confirmed for this listing.

3. Load the skill

After inspection, copy the complete folder into your project using one of the commands below, then open a new tool session. The command stops if a folder with the same name already exists: compare the files before replacing it.

Claude Code
test -f '.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/SKILL.md' && test -s '.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/SKILL.md' && mkdir -p '.claude/skills' && test ! -e '.claude/skills/talk-stage4-position' && cp -R '.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24' '.claude/skills/talk-stage4-position'

OpenSkills

OpenSkills must already be installed. The local install/read procedure is checked with OpenSkills 1.5.0, which requires Node.js ≥ 20.6.0. Catalog slugs are not resolved automatically.

Official OpenSkills installation
openskills install './.skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24'

openskills read 'talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24'

Reading should display the installed file content and its base directory. It does not run the skill or install its dependencies.

For an agent that reads AGENTS.md, then sync the index. This command changes AGENTS.md: review the diff before using it.

openskills sync

Manual method or another tool: attach SKILL.md to a conversation, or open it in an agent that can read files. Include any required supporting resources. No universal folder is recognized by every tool.

4. Try a first task

Use a short, synthetic input: an API endpoint, a small document or an interface brief. In a new conversation, attach the file or give the agent its path, then adapt this request:

Read .skill-downloads/talk-stage-4-position-ms47vp24/SKILL.md and apply its instructions to this example: [describe a test input]. Identify any missing files, dependencies or access. Produce the result requested by the skill without inventing data or running unreviewed scripts.

Expected result: output matching the skill instructions, or a precise list of missing prerequisites. A read confirmation alone does not validate a first use. If an external resource is unavailable, that path remains untested.

Related skills