Context: I want to pitch a few talks to conferences in my field (game audio), and its not something I do regularly so I don't have established workflow for it. I do write linkedin posts and prep for my DND sessions, but that output is significantly different than a 30m to 1hr talk. I've been doing one approach, which I'll outline below, but I'm wondering if others have done this and have a more efficient way of getting to a final result, the below took me 2 sessions both a few hours each, and I'd love to compress that. Wondering about other approaches or resources to help create a better framework. Current process (captured in a skill after finishing last submission): 1. Claude asks : "What could you talk about from memory right now, without looking anything up?" and "What do you know how to do, or think about, that most people in your field don't?" (this takes a long time) 2. feed it which conference, deadline, and format the talk submission is 3. Claude researches past accepted talks for fit and content 4. We lock in thesis, pillars, and target audience (this takes the longest) 5. we do a draft in this order: Description, takeaway, outline 6. Pre-submission review (this part is easy with humanizer and the conference form submission) Wondering if there are places I could improve? And how would others approach this?

Practicing building in public and wanted to share what I've built with help from my other writing brainstorming thread from @Deacon Wardlow and @Siv Darmalingum @E G and @David Trammel Using some of their ideas I did research on the writers and topics they suggested using Notebook LM. I synthesized that research into digestible artifacts for claude to extract themes and guidelines for developing conference talks. I then described to Claude the workflow I wanted to build, can share that prompt if people are interested. And then I also used the workspace-builder as a model for the scaffolding for the conference-talk-engine and my own workspace as models for schema in the Claude and Context mds. The output of all of this was a spec document to build the workspace. I incorporated guidelines to use SOLID principles for coding to allow a built workspace to be extended and improved upon over time without having to rebuild the whole workspace, this is because I think it's better to build a prototype fast and then iterate rather than be 100% perfect. You want to spend time to make sure that the spec doesn't produce errors, but some things will only show up with actual use cases. I then researched existing skills relevant to my use case and came up with 2: conference-talk-builder and giving-presentations. I asked claude to evaluate my research and the existing skills to see what gaps could be improved in the existing skill. I then asked it to write the spec After first draft of the spec I ran a reader-test which is a custom skill derived from @Ari Evergreen 's 6 phase workflow. A rough breakdown would be: 1) research data inputs and relevant skills, compile any useful context relevant to your workflow; 2) analyze inputs with claude; 3) describe your ideal workflow and any models you want to emulate, make sure to mention you are building a spec first; 4) review plan for spec; 5) draft the spec using claude; 6) reader-test to qa the spec.

You learned the framework. Now try it on something you're actually working on. Vote below, then drop your prompt structure in the comments. Not the output. The structure. Show us how you set it up.