Content Analysis

Content Analysis

Turn source material into a structured explanation of what it says, how it supports its claims, what follows from it, and where uncertainty remains.

Runtime Compatibility

• Resolve local files from the current workspace or this skill directory.
• Use tools available in the active runtime to fetch, transcribe, or inspect the source.
• Verify that extraction or transcription is usable before analyzing details.
• If access is incomplete, describe the exact boundary of the analysis.

Select The Analysis Lens

Choose only the lenses that serve the request:

• Argument: claims, reasons, evidence, and conclusion.
• Editorial: structure, clarity, pacing, framing, and audience fit.
• Research: method, evidence quality, limits, and competing explanations.
• Practical: decisions, habits, procedures, and applications.
• Comparative: agreement, conflict, and differences in assumptions.
• Media: speaker roles, sequence, emphasis, and transcript reliability.

Workflow

1. Identify the source

   • Record title, creator, date, format, and available sections when known.
   • Distinguish original material from commentary, reposts, and excerpts.

2. Check completeness

   • For video or audio, confirm transcript coverage and speaker labels.
   • For documents, check page or section coverage.
   • For web material, note paywalls, dynamic content, or missing attachments.

3. Map the content

   • State the central question or purpose.
   • Break the material into major claims, themes, or stages.
   • Attach supporting evidence to the claim it is meant to support.

4. Evaluate

   • Test whether evidence actually supports the conclusion.
   • Identify assumptions, omitted alternatives, contradictions, and ambiguity.
   • Separate source statements from your own inference.

5. Extract value

   • Rank the strongest insights.
   • Convert applicable ideas into concrete actions or questions.
   • Preserve important limits and conditions.

6. Verify the report

   • Check quotes against the source.
   • Check names, numbers, dates, and attribution.
   • Remove observations that cannot be traced to the material.

Default Output

markdownCopy code
## Overview
[Purpose and central message]

## Main Ideas
1. [Claim or theme]
2. [Claim or theme]

## Evidence And Reasoning
- [Claim]: [support and evaluation]

## Strongest Insights
- [Source-grounded insight]

## Assumptions Or Gaps
- [Missing evidence, ambiguity, or alternative explanation]

## Practical Use
- [Action, decision, or question]

## Source Limits
- [Access, extraction, transcription, or scope limitation]

Change this structure when the user asks for a critique, comparison, timeline, study guide, action plan, or another specific deliverable.

Source Integrity

• Quote only words present in the inspected source.
• Keep quotations short and attribute them when the speaker is known.
• Do not invent transcript segments, timestamps, facts, or recommendations.
• Label deductions as analysis rather than source claims.
• Treat promotional claims and personal anecdotes as evidence of limited type.
• For multiple sources, identify which source supports each disputed point.
• When a source cannot be opened, request the text or transcript instead of presenting a complete analysis.

Final Check

• The report answers the user's actual analytical question.
• Summary, evidence, inference, and opinion remain distinguishable.
• Every quoted or quantitative detail is traceable.
• Important counterevidence and limitations are visible.
• Action items follow from the analysis rather than generic advice.