Skill: cellinlab/cell-opc-case-research (version 0.1.0)

--- name: opc-case-research description: Systematic public-information research for OPC, super-individual, creator IP, and one-person business cases, with Chinese outputs focused on content strategy, IP positioning, channel strategy, business models, timelines, and replicable lessons. Use when Codex needs to research a named person, creator brand, or one-person company case; produce a case brief or structured report; map sources and evidence; compare facts versus inferences; or turn scattered public materials into a reusable research deliverable. metadata: {"openclaw":{"homepage":"https://github.com/cellinlab/cell-skills/tree/main/skills/opc-case-research"}} --- # OPC Case Research ## Overview Use this skill to research a specific person, creator brand, or one-person business case as an "OPC / super-individual / creator IP" example. Default to: - public information only - Chinese output - single-case research - emphasis on content strategy, IP positioning, and business model - explicit separation of facts, inferences, and unknowns ## Quick Start 1. Confirm the target and scope. If the user did not specify depth, use the standard mode. 2. Build a base profile and source map before writing conclusions. 3. Build the timeline before interpreting strategy or causality. 4. Analyze content system, IP positioning, channels, and business model together. 5. End with replicability analysis instead of generic praise. If the request is only a fast initial screen, do not load every reference file. Read only what is needed. ## Default Inputs Treat these as the input contract: - Required: target person, brand, or case name - Optional: focus areas such as content, IP, business model, channels, key decisions, or methods - Optional: depth - `quick`: short case brief - `standard`: structured research output - `deep`: standard output plus evidence tables, samples, and estimates - Optional: time range - Optional: comparison target If the user does not specify otherwise, assume: - use public information - write in Chinese - prioritize content strategy, IP building, and monetization - analyze one case at a time - include a minimum evidence slice in `standard` and `deep` outputs ## Workflow ### 1. Scope the Request Resolve only the ambiguity that blocks the work. If the target is clearly identifiable, start immediately. Set the working mode: - `quick`: decide whether the case is worth deeper study - `standard`: produce the default structured case study - `deep`: add evidence tables, sampling, and cautious estimates ### 2. Build the Base Profile and Source Map Collect: - identity labels - platform presence - official pages or landing pages - visible business entry points - likely primary and secondary sources Prefer source types in this order: - A: first-party statements, official pages, original program or event pages - B: mainstream media, platform profile pages, databases, partner pages - C: reposts, forums, summaries, comments, only for leads Read [references/search-playbook.md](references/search-playbook.md) when constructing search queries, sampling plans, or source maps. ### 3. Build the Timeline First Do not jump straight into opinions. Build an event sequence first. Minimum expectations: - `quick`: 5+ meaningful nodes - `standard`: 10+ nodes - `deep`: 10-20 nodes plus notes on why each node matters Track: - role shifts - platform shifts - format shifts - commercialization upgrades - major public launches or collaborations ### 4. Analyze the Four Core Layers Analyze these together, not in isolation: 1. Identity and positioning 2. Content system and channel strategy 3. Business model and monetization structure 4. Key decisions, turning points, and path evolution Read [references/research-standard.md](references/research-standard.md) for the full checklist and evaluation rules. ### 5. Classify Evidence Carefully Every important point should be marked as one of: - fact - inference - unknown When in doubt, downgrade confidence instead of overstating certainty. Use cautious language for: - revenue structure - team size - conversion assumptions - audience profile assumptions - operational scale Read [references/evidence-schema.md](references/evidence-schema.md) when building evidence tables or appendices. ### 6. Build a Minimum Evidence Slice Even in `standard` mode, do not leave evidence fully implicit. Default to a minimum evidence slice with 6-12 rows or bullet-equivalents that support the most important claims across: - identity or self-positioning - timeline - content or IP - channels - business model If the user did not ask for tables, the evidence slice can be a compact appendix or a short "evidence snapshot" section instead of a full spreadsheet. ### 7. Shrink Claims When Public Information Is Thin When evidence is weak, incomplete, or highly indirect: - narrow the scope instead of compensating with confident writing - separate `confirmed facts`, `best-effort inferences`, and `unknowns` - reduce the depth of business-model claims first - keep a `to verify next` list if the case is still worth researching A smaller but more reliable output is better than a complete-looking report built on speculation. ### 8. Produce the Right Deliverable Choose the smallest deliverable that still answers the user. For `quick`, produce: - one-line positioning - identity tags - main platforms - visible monetization entry points - 3-5 reasons the case matters - open questions For `standard`, produce: - case brief - source map summary - timeline - content and IP analysis - channel analysis - business model analysis - evidence snapshot or minimum evidence slice - replicability analysis - limitations and unknowns For `deep`, add: - full evidence table - content sampling table - business model table - estimate disclosures when needed Read [references/report-template.md](references/report-template.md) before drafting a full report. Use the copyable templates in `assets/` when the output should become a reusable document or table. ## Output Requirements Always aim for: - Chinese writing - research tone, not fan tone - visible structure - evidence awareness - at least a small evidence trail for the main claims - explicit dates or time ranges when claims depend on time - direct linkage between content strategy, channel choice, and business model - actionable takeaways for people studying super-individual paths ## Hard Rules Do not: - use private or non-public information - present unverified claims as facts - invent revenue, team, or deal details - turn gossip into business analysis - hide uncertainty behind confident phrasing When information is weak, say so clearly and narrow the claim. ## Resource Map - [references/research-standard.md](references/research-standard.md) - Read for the full SOP, evidence rules, deliverables, quality bar, and uncertainty handling. - [references/search-playbook.md](references/search-playbook.md) - Read for search query patterns, source mapping, verification rules, and sampling. - [references/evidence-schema.md](references/evidence-schema.md) - Read for field definitions for evidence, timeline, content samples, and business model tables. - [references/report-template.md](references/report-template.md) - Read when drafting a standard long-form report. - [assets/case-brief-template.md](assets/case-brief-template.md) - Use when creating a short case brief. - [assets/research-report-template.md](assets/research-report-template.md) - Use when creating a full report draft. - [assets/evidence-table.csv](assets/evidence-table.csv) - Use when creating the evidence table. - [assets/timeline-table.csv](assets/timeline-table.csv) - Use when creating the timeline table. - [assets/content-sample-table.csv](assets/content-sample-table.csv) - Use when creating the content sampling table. - [assets/business-model-table.csv](assets/business-model-table.csv) - Use when creating the business model table. ## Not for This Skill This skill is not for: - celebrity gossip - private intelligence gathering - legal, financial, or investment due diligence - unsupported claims about real income or private operations

path: agents/openai.yaml
content: interface:
  display_name: "OPC 案例调研"
  short_description: "系统化拆解OPC、一人公司与创作者IP商业路径案例"
  default_prompt: "Use $opc-case-research to research this creator, OPC, or one-person company case in Chinese, focusing on content strategy, IP positioning, and business model."


path: assets/business-model-table.csv
content: revenue_type,product_or_service,pricing_range,frequency,target_user,conversion_entry,stability,scalability,evidence_source,remarks


path: assets/case-brief-template.md
content: # 案例速览卡

## 1. 一句话定位

- 

## 2. 核心身份标签

- 
- 
- 

## 3. 主平台与主要内容形式

- 主阵地：
- 分发阵地：
- 主要内容形式：

## 4. 可见商业入口

- 
- 

## 5. 值得研究的原因

1. 
2. 
3. 

## 6. 关键时间线

1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 

## 7. 初步判断的商业模式

- 主收入可能来自：
- 辅助收入可能来自：
- 品牌势能型收益：

## 8. 最小证据切片

1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 

## 9. 待验证问题

- 
- 
- 

## 10. 信息不足时的收敛结论

- 已确认事实：
- 当前推断：
- 仍然未知：


path: assets/content-sample-table.csv
content: sample_id,link,platform,published_at,content_form,topic_tag,key_point,style_feature,has_conversion_action,remarks


path: assets/evidence-table.csv
content: information_id,information_point,status,source_link,source_level,source_type,published_at,captured_at,summary,cross_verified,related_dimension,remarks


path: assets/research-report-template.md
content: # 超级个体案例调研报告

## 1. 案例摘要

### 1.1 一句话结论

### 1.2 为什么值得研究

### 1.3 核心启发

### 1.4 证据摘要

## 2. 对象基本档案

### 2.1 名称与身份标签

### 2.2 公开自我定位

### 2.3 主平台与公开入口

## 3. 成长路径与职业迁移

### 3.1 关键经历

### 3.2 能力积累

### 3.3 关键迁移节点

## 4. IP 定位与内容策略

### 4.1 核心主张

### 4.2 内容主题地图

### 4.3 内容形式与栏目结构

### 4.4 风格与角色感

## 5. 渠道矩阵与传播方式

### 5.1 主阵地

### 5.2 分发阵地

### 5.3 渠道适配与导流

## 6. 商业模式与收入来源拆解

### 6.1 收入结构

### 6.2 主收入与辅助收入

### 6.3 稳定性与风险集中度

### 6.4 可扩展性判断

## 7. 关键决策节点复盘

### 7.1 节点一

### 7.2 节点二

### 7.3 节点三

## 8. 价值观、思维模型与方法论

### 8.1 反复出现的关键词

### 8.2 对内容与商业边界的影响

## 9. 可复制性分析

### 9.1 可复制

### 9.2 半可复制

### 9.3 高门槛或不可复制

## 10. 对目标用户的启发

### 10.1 对超级个体学习者的启发

### 10.2 可行动建议

## 11. 待验证信息与研究局限

### 11.1 待验证信息

### 11.2 研究局限

### 11.3 信息不足时的收敛结论

## 12. 附录

### 12.1 时间线

### 12.2 证据库

### 12.3 内容抽样表

### 12.4 商业模式拆解表


path: assets/timeline-table.csv
content: time,event,type,impact,source_link,remarks


path: references/evidence-schema.md
content: # Evidence Schema

Use these schemas when producing structured appendices or reusable research tables.

## 1. Evidence Table

Purpose:

- track important claims
- record evidence quality
- support traceable reporting

Suggested columns:

| Column | Meaning |
| --- | --- |
| information_id | Stable id for the claim |
| information_point | Claim, fact, or conclusion |
| status | fact / inference / unknown |
| source_link | Direct source URL |
| source_level | A / B / C |
| source_type | first-party / official / media / database / repost |
| published_at | Source publish date if available |
| captured_at | Research capture date |
| summary | Short evidence note |
| cross_verified | Y / N |
| related_dimension | background / content / channel / business / timeline / values |
| remarks | conflict, caveat, or extra note |

## 2. Timeline Table

Purpose:

- build chronology before writing interpretation

Suggested columns:

| Column | Meaning |
| --- | --- |
| time | year or year-month |
| event | what happened |
| type | career / content / platform / business / activity / lifestyle |
| impact | why this matters |
| source_link | direct source URL |
| remarks | uncertainty, conflict, or context |

## 3. Content Sample Table

Purpose:

- avoid sampling bias
- track format, topic, and conversion behavior

Suggested columns:

| Column | Meaning |
| --- | --- |
| sample_id | Stable sample id |
| link | Direct URL |
| platform | Where it was published |
| published_at | Publish date |
| content_form | video / article / podcast / live / event page |
| topic_tag | Main topic or series |
| key_point | Main point or claim |
| style_feature | Style or structure note |
| has_conversion_action | Y / N |
| remarks | extra note |

## 4. Business Model Table

Purpose:

- map visible monetization structure
- separate stable revenue from speculative guesses

Suggested columns:

| Column | Meaning |
| --- | --- |
| revenue_type | content / service / product / event / sponsorship / indirect asset |
| product_or_service | Named offer or revenue item |
| pricing_range | Public price or cautious range |
| frequency | one-off / recurring / seasonal / unclear |
| target_user | intended buyer or audience |
| conversion_entry | where the user enters |
| stability | low / medium / high / unclear |
| scalability | low / medium / high / unclear |
| evidence_source | direct source URL or page |
| remarks | uncertainty or additional note |

## 5. Minimum Evidence Slice Guidance

Use this when the user wants a standard report but not a full database export.

Recommended minimum:

- 6-12 entries
- at least 1 entry for identity or self-positioning
- at least 2 entries for timeline
- at least 1 entry for content or IP
- at least 1 entry for channels
- at least 1 entry for business model or monetization clues

Acceptable formats:

- a short table
- a bullet list with direct links
- a compact appendix called `evidence snapshot`

The goal is to leave a visible audit trail for the most important claims.

## 6. Status Guidance

Use `fact` when a public source directly supports the point.

Use `inference` when the point is a reasoned conclusion based on multiple signals or a clearly stated assumption.

Use `unknown` when the available evidence does not justify a conclusion.

## 7. Weak-Evidence Handling

If an important dimension is thin on public evidence:

- keep the row, but label it `unknown` or `inference`
- explain the missing variable in `remarks`
- prefer `visible clue` wording over definitive wording
- do not convert absence of evidence into a confident negative conclusion

## 8. Estimate Guidance

When a table includes estimates:

- state the time range
- show the visible variables
- prefer ranges over single values
- note omitted factors such as taxes, platform cuts, or cost structure
- label it clearly as inference, not fact


path: references/report-template.md
content: # Report Template Guide

Use this structure when the user asks for a standard or deep case study.

## Recommended Report Order

1. Executive summary
2. Basic profile
3. Growth path and career migration
4. IP positioning and content strategy
5. Channel matrix and distribution
6. Business model and revenue structure
7. Key decisions and turning points
8. Values, thinking models, and method
9. Replicability analysis
10. Lessons for the target reader
11. Open questions, research limits, and fallback conclusion
12. Appendices

## Writing Guidance by Section

### 1. Executive Summary

Answer in a compact form:

- who this case is
- why it matters
- what is distinctive
- what people studying super-individual paths should pay attention to
- what evidence most strongly supports the core conclusion

### 2. Basic Profile

Include:

- name or brand
- core identity tags
- public self-description
- main platforms
- visible monetization entry points

### 3. Growth Path and Career Migration

Show:

- early background if public
- key stages
- capability accumulation
- migration path into creator or solo-business mode

### 4. IP Positioning and Content Strategy

Analyze:

- core proposition
- long-term topics
- content formats
- style and narrative mode
- role identity
- content ladder if visible

### 5. Channel Matrix and Distribution

Explain:

- main platform
- distribution platforms
- adaptation across platforms
- visible traffic or conversion paths

### 6. Business Model and Revenue Structure

Separate:

- main revenue sources
- secondary revenue sources
- recurring vs one-off
- cash flow vs brand leverage
- concentration risks

### 7. Key Decisions and Turning Points

For each major node:

- what changed
- why it mattered
- what it likely enabled

### 8. Values, Thinking Models, and Method

Look for:

- repeated principles
- stable worldviews
- how those views shape content, cooperation, and boundaries

### 9. Replicability Analysis

Always separate:

- replicable
- partially replicable
- high-barrier or non-replicable

Explain why.

### 10. Lessons for the Target Reader

Translate the case into concrete insights for the intended learner.

### 11. Open Questions and Research Limits

List:

- weak evidence areas
- unresolved conflicts
- important unknowns
- what can be stated safely despite the gaps
- what should be treated only as a clue or inference

### 12. Appendices

Use appendices for:

- timeline
- evidence tables
- sample tables
- business model tables
- source list


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)