Skill Concept Brief — Context & Inputs
What You Need Before Writing the Brief
Handraiser Mode Inputs
| Input | Where It Comes From | Required? |
|---|---|---|
| IP direction | Kathryn — concept titles, angles, framings for what the skill should do | Yes |
| Series position | Campaign architecture — which skill number, what was teased | Yes |
| Problem statement | Discussion — what does the user not know that they should? | Yes |
| Existing IP scan | Search vault IP library, campaigns, concept briefs, and business-aos reference (see IP Search Locations below) | Yes |
| Input path | What does the user paste? Must be zero-friction (something they already have) | Yes |
| Skill #1 connection | Can Skill #1 output feed this skill? | Check |
| Foundational dependency | Does this need Service List / ICP / Voice to work? Does it work without them? | Check |
| IP gap assessment | Are there gaps in documented IP that require a content interview? | Yes |
| Teaching story | Real test results — what happened when Kathryn ran it | Not yet — comes after testing |
Intensive Mode — Additional Inputs
| Input | Where It Comes From | Required? |
|---|---|---|
| Intensive Concept Brief | content-pipeline/concept-briefs/intensive-concept-brief-[topic].md | Yes — this is your primary source. It contains the arc, IP direction per session, and skill definitions. |
| Session position | Which session (1, 2, or 3) and what comes before/after in the arc | Yes — from the Intensive Concept Brief's Arc table |
| Practice Brain input design | What structured reference files does this skill read from? (client roster, services catalog, etc.) | Yes — from the Intensive Concept Brief's Groundwork section |
| Upstream skill output | If this is Session 2 or 3: what does the previous skill produce that this skill can read? | Yes for Sessions 2-3 |
| Downstream skill input | If this is Session 1 or 2: what does the next skill need from this skill's output? | Yes for Sessions 1-2 |
| Handraiser version | Does a handraiser skill serve the same job? If yes, what's the upgrade path? | Check — from the Intensive Concept Brief's Cohesion Check |
| Graceful degradation | What happens if the Practice Brain is incomplete (participant didn't finish Groundwork)? | Yes — skill must still run with manual input fallback |
Key difference: In Handraiser mode, the input path is "what do they paste." In Intensive mode, the input path is "what Practice Brain files does the skill read from, and what's the manual fallback."
IP Search Locations (Mandatory)
Search ALL of these locations for every brief. Do not skip any. The vault IP library and campaigns contain the deepest methodology — these are where Kathryn's thinking lives as built assets, not thin reference files.
| Priority | Location | What's There | What to Look For |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | advisory-os-vault/content/business/marketing/ip-library/ | GPT assistant system prompts (.txt) — full methodology, conversation flows, frameworks, output structures | Deep methodology that can be adapted for the skill. These contain the "how" — signal types, diagnostic questions, classification systems, action frameworks. |
| 2 | advisory-os-vault/content/business/marketing/ip-library/micromagnet-archive-2026-3-15/ | Micro-magnet source files (.docx) — Kathryn's concept titles as fully developed guides | The original guide content behind each concept title. Binary .docx — note the file exists and its title even if you can't read it. |
| 3 | advisory-os-vault/content/business/marketing/campaigns/ | 12+ campaign folders with articles, micro-tools, calculators, skill files, narratives, email sequences | IP baked into built assets. Articles contain frameworks explained. Micro-tools contain scoring logic and diagnostic methodology. Skill files contain production methodology. Search for campaigns related to the skill's problem space. |
| 4 | advisory-os-vault/content/business/marketing/content-pipeline/concept-briefs/ | Concept briefs for micro-magnets — problem statements, frameworks, audience definitions, solution previews | Adjacent IP that may overlap or inform. Check differentiation — is this skill covering the same ground as an existing concept brief? |
| 5 | advisory-os-vault/content/frameworks/ | Production kits — methodology for building things | Not IP source for skills, but check if a related kit exists that affects how this skill should be designed. |
| 6 | business-aos/reference/proof/angles/ | Named frameworks — thin reference files | Thin reference only. The vault IP library has the real methodology. Note these as reference, not source. |
| 7 | business-aos/reference/proof/case-studies/ | Engagement arcs | Real examples that may inform teaching stories or validation. |
| 8 | business-aos/reference/core/ip-inventory.md | Full IP catalog | Cross-reference to make sure nothing is missed. |
Search order matters. Start with the vault IP library (priorities 1-4) before checking business-aos reference files (priorities 6-8). The vault contains built methodology. business-aos contains thin reference. If the same concept appears in both places, the vault version is the one to source from.
IP Sourcing Rules
- Kathryn's concepts are the primary IP. When she provides title options, angles, or framings — those ARE the source material. Don't go hunting for existing files to replace them.
- Vault IP library is the primary methodology source. GPT assistant files contain deep methodology — conversation flows, diagnostic frameworks, classification systems, output structures. Campaign assets contain IP baked into articles, micro-tools, and calculators. Search these FIRST.
- Existing angle files are thin reference, not source. The business-aos angle files are summary-level. The vault IP library and campaigns have the real depth. Note angle files as "reference" only.
- Map every skill section to an IP concept. Each signal type, output section, or framework element should trace back to a specific concept from Kathryn's direction. If it doesn't trace back, question whether it belongs.
- Don't fabricate IP. If the skill needs a concept that doesn't exist yet, flag it. Don't invent frameworks and pretend they're established.
Zero-Friction Input Test
Before the brief is validated, the input path must pass the appropriate test:
Handraiser Mode
| Question | Must Answer Yes |
|---|---|
| Does the user already have this data? | Yes — no assembling, no exports, no homework |
| Can they paste it in under 2 minutes? | Yes — copy from inbox, CRM, or Skill #1 output |
| Does it work with messy, incomplete data? | Yes — real emails, not formatted spreadsheets |
| Is there a second input path? | Ideally — Skill #1 output as an alternative input |
Intensive Mode
| Question | Must Answer Yes |
|---|---|
| Does the skill read from Practice Brain reference files? | Yes — structured data from the Groundwork |
| Does it degrade gracefully without Practice Brain? | Yes — falls back to manual/conversational input. Output is weaker but not broken. |
| Can the previous skill's output feed this skill? | Yes (Sessions 2-3) — document which output sections map to which input |
| Is the output structured so the next skill can read it? | Yes (Sessions 1-2) — document the output format the downstream skill expects |
| Can they install, customize, and run within ~50 minutes? | Yes — session time constraint |
If any answer is no, redesign the input.