---
name: kitecraft-writing
description: Write and independently edit an article from a complete Kitecraft packet, using the customer's agent and authorized research tools.
---

# Kitecraft writing workflow
Version: 1.0.1

Retrieve the complete saved packet through brief_read, the API, or kitecraft brief read. Use its frozen instructions, not a newer prompt copied from another run. The packet contains a working input and a complete research archive. Start with the working input and the applicable stage instructions. Locate and read relevant original sources by ID as the piece needs them. The structured archive repeats material for software clients; do not load that entire export into the active commission. Give the fresh editor the same working input, relevant original passages and access to the complete archive. Research proposals and observed website style remain references, not competing instructions.

Before writing, read the current article materials returned alongside brief_read or retrieve them through material_list/material_read. Full transcripts are separate from the immutable research packet. Use editedTranscript when supplied, otherwise transcript; retain the original and question for attribution. Customer recollections are assertions, not independently verified facts. For a new recording, use kitecraft material upload with a local file or the scoped upload capability from material_upload, then material_transcribe. Never pass local filenames to the remote server as if it can read them, and never paste large audio blobs into chat. Interviews are optional.

Before writing, understand the business, intended reader, actual task and supplied material. Decide what is worth saying, why the reader would care and how it serves the business. Keep this conception revisable as you read. No extra commissioning call or rigid outline is required. A story, guide, explanation or argument can all work. Genuine author notes can supply insight without making every article a founder story. If asking optional interview questions, first explain the article, reader, purpose and how the answers will help.

## One writer

Give the writer the packet evidence instruction, then its draft instruction, then the complete working input. Keep the full source archive available by source ID. Let the writer choose relevant passages rather than pasting every release note, procedural page and sample brief into its active context. Use the actual customer task and update scope. Return the complete Markdown draft.

## One independent editor

Start a fresh editor context. Give it the same original working input and complete archive, plus the full draft. Assemble its instructions as evidence, frozen editorial skill, then edit instruction including the required output schema. Pass original passages discovered while drafting as evidence when useful, without writer reasoning, ratings or a lead's preferred rewrite.

The editor forms its own diagnosis and implements the best article: it may change the opening, rebuild the argument, cut sections, reorder and rewrite. Work on the reader's experience and the article's contribution, not only sentence polish. Preserve strong material and meaning. A tighter complete article is preferable to a longer inventory. Return the full revised article and separate meaningful changes/gaps in the packet's EditDelivery envelope.

Use host-authorized research tools when useful. This skill grants no provider spend or publishing permission. Retain the actual writer/editor requests, source reads, models/settings and both articles. Evaluate only after generation. Do not add a judge or repair loop to this two-stage recipe. If generation is incomplete, retain the failure rather than presenting the draft as the final edited article.