derive-section-voice-overlay
$
npx mdskill add lyndonkl/claude/derive-section-voice-overlayGenerate per-section voice deltas when a section hits three posts.
- Captures tone, structure, and vocabulary shifts from global profiles.
- Reads published posts and the global voice-profile markdown file.
- Extracts specific pattern differences to draft a delta overlay.
- Writes the draft to a shared context file awaiting writer review.
SKILL.md
.github/skills/derive-section-voice-overlayView on GitHub ↗
---
name: derive-section-voice-overlay
description: Derives a draft per-section voice overlay (deltas against substacker global voice-profile) once a section reaches ≥3 published posts with shared voice tells. Writes to shared-context/voices/{slug}.md. Writer reviews and commits. Overlay expresses only the DELTA from global voice — not a full rewrite. Use when a section crosses the 3-post threshold. Trigger keywords: voice overlay, section voice, overlay delta, per-section voice.
---
# Derive Section Voice Overlay
## Workflow
```
When a section reaches ≥3 posts:
- [ ] Step 1: Read all posts in corpus/published/{section}/
- [ ] Step 2: Read global shared-context/voice-profile.md
- [ ] Step 3: Extract patterns present in this section's posts but different from global:
- Tone shifts (confessional vs technical; register)
- Structural shifts (scoreboard required; code fences allowed; H2 permitted)
- Vocabulary shifts (term-of-art allowed; jargon defined on first use)
- Register permissions (epistolary, second-person, etc.)
- [ ] Step 4: Draft the overlay as a delta (bullet list per category; NOT a full voice profile)
- [ ] Step 5: Write shared-context/voices/{slug}.md for writer review
- [ ] Step 6: Emit draft status: "awaits writer commit" in the Curator review artifact
```
## Overlay schema
```yaml
---
name: voice-overlay-{slug}
section: {slug}
type: voice-overlay
purpose: Voice deltas for {section name} against global voice-profile.
based_on: voice-profile.md (global)
maintained_by: curator (seed) + writer (refinements)
last_updated: YYYY-MM-DD
---
# {Section name} — Voice Overlay
Apply these on top of the global voice-profile. Where rules conflict, this overlay wins for posts in section `{slug}`.
## Tone shifts
- {delta bullet}
## Structural shifts
- {delta bullet}
## Vocabulary shifts
- {delta bullet}
## Register permissions
- {delta bullet}
## Carryovers (emphasized for this section)
- {global rule that matters even more here}
## Things this section does NOT do (anti-overlay)
- {negative rule — what the section explicitly does not do that the global voice might allow}
## Changelog
- YYYY-MM-DD — Initial overlay derived from N posts.
```
## Worked example
**Section**: Kalshi Log (6 posts).
**Detected patterns vs global**:
- Every post has scoreboard at close (absent from global voice).
- Register leans confessional-operational; the "what actually happened" body, not speculative essay.
- Epistolary second-person register appears in 1 of 6 posts — color, not default.
- No post ends on a universal maxim; all close with forward-looking "next match" or "let's find out."
**Overlay draft**:
```yaml
## Tone shifts
- Register leans confessional-operational, not speculative-essay.
- Closer points forward, not upward (universal maxim rare).
## Structural shifts
- Scoreboard block required at the close of every post.
- More numbers per paragraph than global voice allows.
- Short-form is default (≤1500 words).
## Register permissions
- Epistolary second-person register permitted (as in *The Letter*). Color, not default.
## Anti-overlay
- No generalizing to other sports / markets without explicit scope.
- No "lessons for life" closes.
```
## Guardrails
1. Overlay is a delta, not a full voice rewrite. Keep short.
2. Requires ≥3 published posts in the section. Below that, section uses global voice.
3. Writer reviews and commits. Don't write final overlay without writer confirmation in the Curator review artifact.
4. Flag candidate overlay rules that contradict global — those need the writer's explicit promotion.
5. Voice overlays are refined over time — first draft is a starting point, not a finished system.
More from lyndonkl/claude
- abstraction-concrete-examplesBuilds structured abstraction ladders that translate high-level principles into concrete, actionable examples across 3-5 levels. Bridges communication gaps, reveals hidden assumptions, and tests whether abstract ideas work in practice. Use when explaining concepts at different expertise levels, moving between abstract principles and concrete implementation, identifying edge cases by testing ideas against scenarios, designing layered documentation, decomposing complex problems into actionable steps, or bridging strategy-execution gaps.
- academic-letter-architectGuides the creation of evidence-based academic recommendation letters, reference letters, and award nominations that combine concrete examples, meaningful comparisons, and genuine enthusiasm. Use when writing recommendation letters for students, postdocs, or colleagues, or when user mentions recommendation letter, reference, nomination, letter of support, endorsement, or needs help with strong advocacy and comparative statements.
- adr-architectureDocuments significant architectural and technical decisions with full context, alternatives considered, trade-offs analyzed, and consequences understood. Creates a decision trail that helps teams understand why decisions were made. Use when choosing between technology options, making infrastructure decisions, establishing standards, migrating systems, or when user mentions ADR, architecture decision, technical decision record, or decision documentation.
- adverse-selection-priorProduces a Bayesian prior probability that an offered transaction is +EV for the recipient, given that the counterparty chose to propose it. Applies Akerlof market-for-lemons logic -- if they offered it, they believe it is +EV for them, so the prior that it is +EV for us is materially below 50%. Reusable across trade evaluation, waiver drops (another team dropping a player is also adverse selection), job-offer analysis, M&A, and any "someone offered me this" situation. Use when you receive an unsolicited trade/offer/proposal, analyzing incoming trade prior, evaluating why a counterparty proposed a deal, or when user mentions adverse selection, market for lemons, why did they offer this, incoming trade prior, they proposed it, Bayesian adjustment on received offer.
- alignment-values-north-starCreates actionable alignment frameworks that give teams a shared North Star (direction), values (guardrails), and decision tenets (behavioral standards). Enables autonomous decision-making while maintaining organizational coherence. Use when starting new teams, scaling organizations, defining culture, establishing product vision, resolving misalignment, creating strategic clarity, or when user mentions North Star, team values, mission, principles, guardrails, decision framework, or cultural alignment.
- analogy-weight-checkFor every analogy in a substacker draft, verifies it carries mechanical weight — the analogy does real work explaining the mechanism, not merely decorates it. Cross-references analogy-catalog.md for novelty (is this analogy reused from a prior post?) and domain fit (biology > organizational > sports preferred; physics/military disfavored). Use whenever an analogy appears in the draft. Trigger keywords: analogy weight, decorative, mechanical weight, reused analogy, catalog check, metaphor check.
- answer-uncomfortable-questionTakes one strategic question about substacker ("should we launch paid?", "is this section dead?", "are we writing for the wrong audience?") and produces the mandatory evidence + reasoning + downside triad plus a recommendation. Used 3 times per Growth Strategist review. Trigger keywords: uncomfortable question, strategic question, evidence reasoning downside, triad.
- attribute-performanceFor each substacker post that materially over- or under-performs the rolling baseline (|z| ≥ 1.0), produces a plain-English attribution paragraph with calibrated confidence (high / medium / low / unexplained). Considers subject-line effect, topic zeitgeist, external share, day-of-week, length effect, and audience-notes signals. Labels unexplained outliers explicitly rather than fabricating a story. Use after compute-baseline when outlier posts exist. Trigger keywords: attribution, why did this post work, outlier explanation, performance analysis.
- auction-first-price-shadingComputes the optimal shaded bid for a first-price sealed-bid auction given a true private value, an estimate of the number of competing bidders N, and a value-distribution assumption. Implements the `(N-1)/N` equilibrium shading rule for uniform private values, adjusts for log-normal or empirical value distributions, layers a risk-aversion adjustment, and caps output against the bidder's remaining budget. Domain-neutral auction theory reusable across fantasy sports (baseball FAAB, NBA/NHL waiver auctions), prediction-market limit sizing, sealed procurement bids, and any blind-bid context. Use when user mentions "first-price auction bid", "sealed bid shading", "(N-1)/N", "FAAB bid amount", "auction shading", "optimal bid first-price", "bid for sealed-bid", "blind bid sizing", or when downstream logic needs a principled shade factor rather than an ad-hoc heuristic.
- auction-winners-curse-haircutApplies a Bayesian haircut to a bid valuation for common-value auctions where winning is itself evidence the bidder over-estimated. Takes a raw valuation, a value-type classification (common_value / private_value / mixed), the number of informed bidders N, and a signal-dispersion estimate, and returns an adjusted valuation. Domain-neutral and reusable across fantasy FAAB, prediction markets, M&A bids, ad-auction budgets, and any generic bidding context. Use when user mentions "winner's curse", "common value auction", "valuation haircut", "adverse valuation", "Bayesian bid adjustment", or "over-paying in auction".