AEO Content Skill (Free)
Source: github.com/psyduckler/aeo-skills
Part of: AEO Skills Suite — Prompt Research → Content → Analytics
Create or refresh content that AI assistants want to cite — using zero paid APIs.
Requirements
- -
web_fetch — analyze currently-cited sources and existing content - INLINECODE1 — find competing content (Brave free tier, optional)
- LLM reasoning — research, brief, draft, and evaluate
Mode Detection
- - Create mode — User provides a target prompt but no existing URL → write new content
- Refresh mode — User provides an existing page URL (+ optional target prompt) → audit and update
Input
- - Target prompt (required for create, optional for refresh) — the AI prompt this content should win
- Brand/domain (required) — who the content is for
- Existing URL (refresh mode) — the page to update
- Topic context (optional) — additional info about the brand's angle
- Content type (optional) — guide, comparison, how-to, explainer
Create Mode Workflow
Step 1: AI Landscape Research
Search the target prompt and close variants to understand the current answer landscape:
- 1. Web search the exact prompt — search engines show similar sources to what AI cites
web_fetch the top 5-10 results — these are the pages AI models draw fromweb_search for "[topic]" site:reddit.com — find real user questions and discussions
For each top-ranking page, extract:
- - Main points and structure
- Unique data, frameworks, or insights
- Gaps — what they miss or get wrong
- Freshness — when was it last updated?
Step 2: Build the Content Brief
Use the template in references/content-brief-template.md to structure research.
Key decisions:
- - Mandatory topics — every sub-topic the AI currently covers in its answer
- Unique value angle — what will this content add that no current source provides? (Most important decision.)
- Content structure — outline with H2/H3 headings that mirror question phrasing
- Target specs — word count, format, tone
Step 3: Write Citation-Worthy Content
Draft following citation signals from references/citation-signals.md. Key principles:
- - Lead each section with a direct, quotable 1-2 sentence answer
- Use descriptive headings that match question phrasing
- Include original data, frameworks, or expert perspective
- Name specific tools, companies, people, statistics
- Cover every sub-question the AI currently answers, then go deeper on 2-3 areas
- Cut fluff — every paragraph earns its place
Step 4: Self-Evaluate
Before delivering, check the draft against currently-cited sources:
- 1. Coverage — addresses every topic the top sources cover?
- Depth — goes deeper on at least 2-3 areas?
- Uniqueness — offers something no current source has?
- Extractability — AI can pull a direct answer from each section?
- Entity richness — specific names, tools, numbers throughout?
- Freshness — examples, data, references are current?
Step 5: Deliver with Publishing Guidance
Output final content plus title, meta description (150-160 chars), and:
- - Add publication date + author byline with credentials
- Ensure page is indexable (no noindex, no paywall)
- Add schema markup if applicable (FAQ, HowTo, Article)
- Internal link from existing related content
- Re-check target prompt in AI models 2-4 weeks after indexing
Refresh Mode Workflow
Step R0: Audit the Existing Page
Before any landscape research, analyze the current page:
- 1.
web_fetch the existing URL — get the full content - Extract current structure: headings, topics covered, depth per section
- Note: publication date, last updated date, author info
- Check freshness: outdated stats, old tool names, expired examples, stale references
- Identify what's already strong (keep these sections)
Step R1: AI Landscape Research
Same as Create Step 1 — research what AI models currently cite for the target prompt. If no target prompt was provided, infer it from the page's topic and title.
Step R2: Gap Analysis (Diff)
Compare existing content against the competitive landscape:
- - Missing topics — sub-topics AI covers that the page doesn't → flag for addition
- Outdated info — old statistics, discontinued tools, expired examples → flag for replacement
- Missing entities — competitors, tools, people the AI mentions that the page doesn't → flag for inclusion
- Structural issues — buried answers, vague headings, no clear extractable statements → flag for restructure
- Freshness gaps — old dates, prior-year references → flag for update
- Strengths to preserve — sections already well-written, potentially already cited → keep as-is
Output: a prioritized list of changes with rationale for each.
Step R3: Edit (Not Rewrite)
Apply changes surgically:
- - Add new sections for coverage gaps (place them logically in the existing structure)
- Update outdated data points, examples, tool names, statistics
- Restructure weak sections — add extractable lead sentences, improve headings
- Weave in missing entities naturally (don't keyword-stuff)
- Preserve sections that are already strong
- Update publication/modified date
Output the refreshed content with clear markup showing changes:
- -
[ADDED] — new sections or paragraphs - INLINECODE9 — modified existing content
- INLINECODE10 — reorganized for better extractability
- INLINECODE11 — kept as-is (note why it's strong)
Step R4: Before/After Summary
Provide a clear comparison:
- - What was added (new sections, topics, entities)
- What was updated (stats, examples, references)
- What was restructured (headings, lead sentences)
- What was removed (outdated info)
- Expected impact on citation-worthiness
Step R5: Self-Evaluate + Deliver
Same 6-point evaluation as Create Step 4, plus:
- - Does the refresh maintain the page's existing voice and style?
- Are all internal/external links still valid?
- Is the updated date reflected?
Deliver with the same publishing guidance as Create Step 5.
Tips
- - The unique value angle is make-or-break for both modes
- For refresh: resist the urge to rewrite everything. Surgical edits that add missing pieces are more efficient and preserve existing authority
- First-party data is the strongest citation signal — if the brand has relevant data, use it prominently
- For comparison prompts ("X vs Y"), be balanced — AI models avoid citing biased sources
- Shorter, sharper content that directly answers the prompt beats long rambling pieces
- This skill pairs with
aeo-prompt-research-free which identifies target prompts
AEO 内容技能(免费版)
来源: github.com/psyduckler/aeo-skills
所属: AEO 技能套件 — 提示词研究 → 内容 → 分析
创建或刷新AI助手愿意引用的内容——无需使用任何付费API。
要求
- - webfetch — 分析当前被引用的来源和现有内容
- websearch — 查找竞争内容(Brave免费版,可选)
- LLM推理 — 研究、简报、草稿和评估
模式检测
- - 创建模式 — 用户提供目标提示词但无现有URL → 撰写新内容
- 刷新模式 — 用户提供现有页面URL(+可选的目标提示词)→ 审计并更新
输入
- - 目标提示词(创建模式必填,刷新模式可选)— 此内容应胜出的AI提示词
- 品牌/域名(必填)— 内容面向的对象
- 现有URL(刷新模式)— 需要更新的页面
- 主题背景(可选)— 关于品牌角度的额外信息
- 内容类型(可选)— 指南、对比、教程、解释说明
创建模式工作流程
第1步:AI格局研究
搜索目标提示词及其相近变体,以了解当前的答案格局:
- 1. 网络搜索精确提示词 — 搜索引擎显示与AI引用相似的来源
- webfetch 前5-10个结果 — 这些是AI模型引用的页面
- websearch 搜索 [主题] site:reddit.com — 查找真实的用户问题和讨论
对于每个排名靠前的页面,提取:
- - 主要观点和结构
- 独特的数据、框架或见解
- 差距——他们遗漏或错误的地方
- 新鲜度——上次更新时间?
第2步:构建内容简报
使用 references/content-brief-template.md 中的模板来组织研究。
关键决策:
- - 必选主题 — AI当前在其答案中涵盖的每个子主题
- 独特价值角度 — 此内容将提供哪些当前来源没有的内容?(最重要的决策。)
- 内容结构 — 使用与问题表述相匹配的H2/H3标题大纲
- 目标规格 — 字数、格式、语气
第3步:撰写值得引用的内容
按照 references/citation-signals.md 中的引用信号进行草稿撰写。关键原则:
- - 每个部分以直接、可引用的1-2句答案开头
- 使用与问题表述相匹配的描述性标题
- 包含原创数据、框架或专家视角
- 提及具体的工具、公司、人物、统计数据
- 涵盖AI当前回答的每个子问题,然后在2-3个领域深入探讨
- 去除冗余——每个段落都要有其存在的价值
第4步:自我评估
在交付前,对照当前被引用的来源检查草稿:
- 1. 覆盖度 — 是否涵盖了顶级来源涉及的所有主题?
- 深度 — 是否至少在2-3个领域有更深入的探讨?
- 独特性 — 是否提供了当前来源没有的内容?
- 可提取性 — AI能否从每个部分提取出直接答案?
- 实体丰富度 — 是否通篇包含具体的名称、工具、数字?
- 新鲜度 — 示例、数据、引用是否都是最新的?
第5步:附带发布指南交付
输出最终内容,包括标题、元描述(150-160字符),以及:
- - 添加发布日期和作者署名(含资质)
- 确保页面可被索引(无noindex,无付费墙)
- 如适用,添加Schema标记(FAQ、HowTo、Article)
- 从现有的相关内容进行内部链接
- 在索引后2-4周内,在AI模型中重新检查目标提示词
刷新模式工作流程
第R0步:审计现有页面
在进行任何格局研究之前,分析当前页面:
- 1. web_fetch 现有URL — 获取完整内容
- 提取当前结构:标题、涵盖的主题、每个部分的深度
- 记录:发布日期、最后更新日期、作者信息
- 检查新鲜度:过时的统计数据、旧的工具名称、过期的示例、陈旧的引用
- 识别已经很强的部分(保留这些部分)
第R1步:AI格局研究
与创建模式第1步相同——研究AI模型当前为目标提示词引用的内容。如果未提供目标提示词,则从页面的主题和标题推断。
第R2步:差距分析(差异对比)
将现有内容与竞争格局进行比较:
- - 缺失的主题 — AI涵盖但页面未包含的子主题 → 标记为需要添加
- 过时的信息 — 旧的统计数据、已停用的工具、过期的示例 → 标记为需要替换
- 缺失的实体 — AI提及但页面未包含的竞争对手、工具、人物 → 标记为需要纳入
- 结构问题 — 埋藏的答案、模糊的标题、无明确可提取的陈述 → 标记为需要重组
- 新鲜度差距 — 旧的日期、前一年的引用 → 标记为需要更新
- 需保留的优势 — 已经写得很好、可能已被引用的部分 → 保持原样
输出:按优先级排序的更改列表,并附上每项更改的理由。
第R3步:编辑(非重写)
精准地应用更改:
- - 添加 覆盖差距的新部分(在现有结构中合理放置)
- 更新 过时的数据点、示例、工具名称、统计数据
- 重组 薄弱部分——添加可提取的引导句,改进标题
- 自然融入 缺失的实体(不要关键词堆砌)
- 保留 已经很强大的部分
- 更新 发布/修改日期
输出刷新后的内容,并使用清晰的标记显示更改:
- - [已添加] — 新的部分或段落
- [已更新] — 修改过的现有内容
- [已重组] — 为更好的可提取性而重新组织
- [未更改] — 保持原样(注明为何强大)
第R4步:前后对比摘要
提供清晰的比较:
- - 添加了什么(新的部分、主题、实体)
- 更新了什么(统计数据、示例、引用)
- 重组了什么(标题、引导句)
- 移除了什么(过时的信息)
- 对引用价值的预期影响
第R5步:自我评估 + 交付
与创建模式第4步相同的6点评估,外加:
- - 刷新是否保持了页面现有的语气和风格?
- 所有内部/外部链接是否仍然有效?
- 更新日期是否已体现?
按照创建模式第5步相同的发布指南交付。
提示
- - 独特价值角度对于两种模式都是成败关键
- 对于刷新模式:克制重写一切的冲动。精准编辑以补充缺失部分更高效,且能保留现有权威性
- 第一方数据是最强的引用信号——如果品牌有相关数据,请突出使用
- 对于对比提示词(X vs Y),要保持平衡——AI模型会避免引用有偏见的来源
- 更短、更精炼、直接回答提示词的内容优于冗长的漫谈文章
- 此技能与 aeo-prompt-research-free 配合使用,后者用于识别目标提示词