Back to Details

article-analyzer

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

文章深度分析技能

In-depth Article Analysis Skill

使用场景

Usage Scenarios

  • 用户提供文章并要求分析
  • 用户想理解文章的核心论点和论证逻辑
  • 用户想批判性审视某篇文章
  • 用户想从文章中提取可复用的思维框架
  • 用户想学习文章的写作技巧
  • Users provide articles and request analysis
  • Users want to understand the core arguments and reasoning logic of the article
  • Users want to critically review a certain article
  • Users want to extract reusable thinking frameworks from articles
  • Users want to learn the writing skills of articles

分析框架

Analysis Framework

按以下五个维度逐层分析，每个问题需具体、有洞察，避免泛泛而谈。若信息不足，说明原因。
Conduct layer-by-layer analysis according to the following five dimensions. Each answer should be specific and insightful, avoid general statements. If information is insufficient, state the reason.

一、核心内容（搞清楚"是什么"）

1. Core Content (Figure out "what it is")

  1. 核心论点：用一句话概括文章的核心论点
  2. 关键概念：作者用了哪些关键概念？这些概念是怎么定义的？
  3. 文章结构：论证是怎么展开的？各部分如何衔接？
  4. 证据支撑：有哪些具体案例、数据或权威引用支撑观点？
  1. Core Argument: Summarize the core argument of the article in one sentence
  2. Key Concepts: What key concepts did the author use? How are these concepts defined?
  3. Article Structure: How is the argument developed? How are each part connected?
  4. Evidence Support: What specific cases, data or authoritative citations support the viewpoints?

二、背景语境（理解"为什么"）

2. Background Context (Understand "why")

  1. 作者身份：作者是谁？其背景、身份、立场是什么？
  2. 写作背景：文章在什么背景下写的？在回应什么现象或争论？
  3. 写作目的：作者想解决什么问题？想影响谁？
  4. 底层假设：作者的底层假设是什么？有哪些没说出来的前提？
  1. Author Identity: Who is the author? What is their background, identity, and position?
  2. Writing Background: Under what context was the article written? What phenomenon or debate is it responding to?
  3. Writing Purpose: What problem does the author want to solve? Who do they want to influence?
  4. Underlying Assumptions: What are the author's underlying assumptions? What unspoken premises are there?

三、批判性审视

3. Critical Review

  1. 可能反驳：主要的反对意见可能是什么？
  2. 论证漏洞：论证有没有漏洞、跳跃或偏颇之处？
  3. 适用边界：观点在什么情况下成立？什么情况下不成立？
  4. 回避问题：作者有没有刻意回避或淡化什么问题？
  1. Possible Rebuttals: What might be the main opposing opinions?
  2. Argument Flaws: Are there any loopholes, leaps or biases in the argument?
  3. Application Boundary: Under what circumstances do the viewpoints hold? Under what circumstances do they not hold?
  4. Avoided Issues: Did the author deliberately avoid or play down any issues?

四、价值提取

4. Value Extraction

  1. 思考框架：作者提出了什么可复用的思考框架或方法论？
  2. 启发一：对于[根据文章内容确定的目标读者角色 1]，能学到什么？
  3. 启发二：对于[根据文章内容确定的目标读者角色 2]，能学到什么？
  4. 认知改变：这篇文章可能改变读者的什么认知？
  1. Thinking Framework: What reusable thinking frameworks or methodologies did the author propose?
  2. Inspiration 1: What can [target reader role 1 determined based on article content] learn?
  3. Inspiration 2: What can [target reader role 2 determined based on article content] learn?
  4. Cognitive Change: What cognition of readers may this article change?

五、写作技巧分析（可选，用户要求时展开）

5. Writing Skill Analysis (Optional, expand when requested by users)

  1. 结构设计：标题、开头、结尾是怎么设计的？
  2. 说服技巧：作者用了什么技巧让文章有说服力？
  3. 值得学习：写法有什么值得学习的地方？
  1. Structure Design: How are the title, opening, and ending designed?
  2. Persuasion Skills: What techniques did the author use to make the article persuasive?
  3. Worth Learning: What are the worth learning points of the writing style?

调用模式

Invocation Mode

被其他技能调用时

When invoked by other skills

当被 
polish
、
outliner
等技能调用时，调用方可能指定特殊要求：
  • 润色模式：不做事实核查，仅在必要时检索背景信息
  • 提纲模式：侧重结构和论证分析
遵循调用方的具体指示。
When invoked by skills such as 
polish
, 
outliner
, etc., the caller may specify special requirements:
  • Polishing Mode: No fact-checking, only retrieve background information when necessary
  • Outline Mode: Focus on structure and argument analysis
Follow the specific instructions of the caller.

联网检索要求

Online Retrieval Requirements

检索判断标准

Retrieval Judgment Criteria

需要检索的情况：
  • 文章引用具体数据（统计数字、研究结论）且你对其准确性存疑
  • 文章引用名人名言、权威观点，且该引用对论证至关重要
  • 文章涉及重大争议事件，需了解各方立场才能做出公正分析
  • 作者是公众人物，其背景立场会影响对文章的理解
  • 你对某个关键事实不确定，无法给出可靠分析
不需要检索的情况：
  • 文章是纯观点/评论性质，不涉及可核查的事实声明
  • 引用的数据/事件是众所周知的常识
  • 文章是虚构作品或个人随笔
  • 所有关键信息你都有足够把握
Situations requiring retrieval:
  • The article cites specific data (statistical figures, research conclusions) and you doubt its accuracy
  • The article quotes famous sayings, authoritative viewpoints, and the citation is crucial to the argument
  • The article involves major controversial events, and it is necessary to understand the positions of all parties to make a fair analysis
  • The author is a public figure, whose background and position will affect the understanding of the article
  • You are unsure about a key fact and cannot provide a reliable analysis
Situations not requiring retrieval:
  • The article is purely opinion/commentary, and does not involve verifiable factual statements
  • The cited data/events are well-known common sense
  • The article is a fictional work or personal essay
  • You are sufficiently confident about all key information

检索类型

Retrieval Types

事实核查（存疑时执行）
  • 核实具体数据、引用、事件
  • 发现问题标注：
    [事实核查：原文称"XXX"，经查证实际为"YYY"]
背景补充（影响理解时执行）
  • 作者背景、事件上下文、争议各方立场
扩展分析（用户要求或分析需要时执行）
  • 其他专家观点、最新进展、反驳论据
Fact-checking (executed when in doubt)
  • Verify specific data, citations, events
  • Mark when problems are found: 
    [事实核查：原文称"XXX"，经查证实际为"YYY"]
Background Supplement (executed when it affects understanding)
  • Author background, event context, positions of parties to the dispute
Extended Analysis (executed when requested by users or required for analysis)
  • Other expert opinions, latest developments, rebuttal arguments

检索原则

Retrieval Principles

  1. 必要性优先：先判断是否真的需要检索，避免无意义的搜索
  2. 不确定就检索：对关键事实存疑时，宁可检索也不猜测
  3. 不要编造：没搜到就说"未找到相关信息"
  4. 标注来源：核查结果注明信息来源
  1. Necessity First: First judge whether retrieval is really needed to avoid meaningless searches
  2. Retrieve When Unsure: When in doubt about key facts, it is better to retrieve than to guess
  3. Do Not Fabricate: If no information is found, say "No relevant information found"
  4. Mark Sources: Indicate the information source for the verification results

执行要求

Execution Requirements

  • 逐一回答每个问题，不跳过
  • 回答要具体、有洞察，引用文章原文佐证
  • 避免空泛的概括性语言
  • 若某问题信息不足，明确说明"信息不足，原因是..."
  • 目标读者角色需根据文章内容自行判断确定
  • 写作技巧分析默认简略，用户要求时详细展开
  • 对关键事实存疑时联网核查，不编造不猜测
  • 开始分析前先评估：本文是否包含需要核查的事实性声明？
  • Answer each question one by one, do not skip
  • Answers should be specific and insightful, cited with the original text of the article as evidence
  • Avoid general and vague language
  • If information for a question is insufficient, clearly state "Insufficient information, the reason is..."
  • The target reader role needs to be determined independently based on the content of the article
  • Writing skill analysis is brief by default, and expanded in detail when requested by users
  • Perform online verification when in doubt about key facts, do not fabricate or guess
  • Evaluate before starting analysis: Does this article contain factual statements that need to be verified?

结果保存

Result Saving

分析完成后，将完整分析结果保存到文章目录：
  1. 保存为 
    analysis.md
  2. 格式保持与输出一致（五个维度的完整分析）
  3. 文件开头添加元信息：
markdown
---
source: source-1.md
analyzed_at: YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm
---
文件结构示例：
posts/2026/01/08/ai-future/
├── source-1.md       # 素材
└── analysis.md       # 分析结果
被其他技能调用时：
  • 由调用方指定保存路径
  • 若调用方未指定，则保存到素材同级目录
After the analysis is completed, save the complete analysis result to the article directory:
  1. Save as 
    analysis.md
  2. The format remains consistent with the output (complete analysis of five dimensions)
  3. Add meta information at the beginning of the file:
markdown
---
source: source-1.md
analyzed_at: YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm
---
File Structure Example:
posts/2026/01/08/ai-future/
├── source-1.md       # 素材
└── analysis.md       # 分析结果
When invoked by other skills:
  • The save path is specified by the caller
  • If not specified by the caller, save to the same level directory as the source material