| name | xhsfenxi |
| description | 小红书博主分析全流程 skill — 拆解账号定位、提炼爆款选题公式、输出结构化报告和商业版 Word。内置三型博主分类体系（荒诞美学型 / 共鸣命名型 / 现实策略型），基于多位真实博主的深度分析沉淀。支持单账号深度拆解、多账号对比、自定义学习报告，证据分级（公开主页→截图→第三方公开资料→推断），所有交付物可一键转为 Markdown + 商业 Word。Use it when the user asks to analyze a Xiaohongshu blogger/account, extract viral topic formulas, compare creators, or produce business-grade deliverables.
|
| keywords | ["xiaohongshu","RED","小红书","小红书分析","博主分析","账号拆解","对标分析","爆款选题","爆款选题公式","内容策略","个人IP分析","创作者分析","三型博主","荒诞美学型","共鸣命名型","现实策略型","品牌符号","结构化总结报告","Word报告","商业版报告","选题公式学习","博主拆解","小红书运营","内容账号分析","竞品分析","账号定位","benchmark account","topic formula","creator research","content audit","account positioning","competitor analysis","archetype classification","viral topic","markdown report","word report","小红书博主对比","爆款内容拆解","内容IP打法"] |
| metadata | {"openclaw":{"runtime":{"node":">=18"}}} |
xhsfenxi — 小红书博主分析 Skill
公开页分析 · 三型博主分类 · 爆款选题公式提炼 · 多账号对比 · Markdown/商业Word交付
When to Use
Use this skill when the user asks to:
- analyze a Xiaohongshu / RED creator account
- identify which archetype a creator belongs to (荒诞美学型 / 共鸣命名型 / 现实策略型)
- summarize an account's positioning, audience, style, or content pillars
- extract a viral topic formula or reusable content method
- compare two or more benchmark creators
- learn what can be copied vs what must stay differentiated
- turn the analysis into a Markdown report, Word report, or business-style deliverable
Typical trigger phrases:
- "分析这个小红书博主"
- "拆一下这个账号"
- "做爆款选题公式"
- "帮我做对标分析"
- "做成商业版 Word"
- "这个博主是哪一型？"
- "compare these two RED creators"
- "extract the topic formula from this account"
Three-Archetype Classification System
Distilled from real analyses of multiple Xiaohongshu creators.
Type A — 荒诞美学型 (Absurdist Aesthetics)
Representative archetype:
Core pattern: wraps serious or philosophical content in absurdist humor and high-quality visuals.
| Dimension | Characteristics |
|---|
| Content kernel | Absurdist filter on everyday life; philosophical undertone |
| What users get | Entertained + moved + aesthetically immersed |
| Title mechanism | Contrast (grand setting × mundane action) + unified brand symbol |
| Brand symbol | A single recurring tag, e.g. "（劲爆）" |
| Expression style | Humorous, high-production, literary naming |
| Commercial fit | High-end lifestyle, travel, photography, luxury brands |
| Replication difficulty | High — depends on accumulated visual aesthetic sensibility |
Identifying markers:
- All content tied together by a signature phrase or visual symbol
- Serious topics expressed lightly; absurd topics expressed earnestly
- Titles feel like literary naming, not just descriptions
Type B — 共鸣命名型 (Resonance & Naming)
Representative archetype:
Core pattern: translates personal experience into universally relatable life-stage propositions, named in memorable ways.
| Dimension | Characteristics |
|---|
| Content kernel | Youth growth, worldview expression, life-stage naming |
| What users get | Understood + named + given a new perspective |
| Title mechanism | Proposition feeling + metaphor + judgment |
| Brand symbol | Signature conceptual phrases and naming patterns |
| Expression style | Warm, perceptive, aesthetically refined |
| Commercial fit | Growth/education/creative platforms, mid-range lifestyle |
| Replication difficulty | Medium — method learnable, requires genuine observation |
Identifying markers:
- Content "names" vague emotional states people couldn't articulate
- Private experience → universal proposition
- Titles read like thoughtful questions or redefinitions
Type C — 现实策略型 (Reality & Strategy)
Representative archetype:
Core pattern: breaks down unspoken real-world rules and provides executable strategies for ordinary people to move upward.
| Dimension | Characteristics |
|---|
| Content kernel | Ordinary woman's upward mobility, reality rule-breaking |
| What users get | Validated + activated + empowered with actionable moves |
| Title mechanism | Conflict words + counter-intuitive framing + strong stance |
| Brand symbol | Self-labeling with perceived weakness (先夺走羞耻感) |
| Expression style | Sharp, realistic, strong-attitude conclusions |
| Commercial fit | Mass consumer, career, e-commerce, practical tools |
| Replication difficulty | Medium — framework learnable; don't copy the surface aggression |
Identifying markers:
- Titles feel slightly improper but undeniably accurate
- Each piece breaks an unspoken rule or collapses an information gap
- Users feel "刺但有用" — uncomfortable but useful
Mixed Formula (Advanced)
The most powerful content often combines two archetypes:
Type B resonance/naming × Type C reality/strategy
= Content that both "understands you" and "tells you what to do next"
Use scripts/archetype.js to quickly identify which archetype(s) an account fits.
Core Operating Rules
- Use public evidence first. Prefer search pages, homepage/profile pages, and other publicly visible surfaces.
- Do not fake detail-page access. If post detail pages are blocked by risk control, say so clearly.
- Grade evidence quality. Treat sources in this order:
- Level A: visible Xiaohongshu public pages / user screenshots
- Level B: other public sources (podcasts, interviews, encyclopedias, analytics sites)
- Level C: synthesis / inference based on repeated visible patterns
- Do not present public estimates as backend truth. Third-party follower or pricing data are supporting clues, not audited facts.
- Ask for 3–10 representative post links or screenshots when the user wants deep post-level analysis.
- Deliver something useful even when blocked. If detail pages fail, still produce a homepage-level strategic report.
- Always identify the archetype. Every analysis should name which of the three types (or hybrid) the account belongs to — this frames the entire report.
Default Workflow
1) Clarify the task shape
Lock the requested output mode before heavy research:
- Structured account report
- Viral topic formula
- Archetype identification
- Two-or-more-account comparison
- "How to learn from this creator without copying them"
- Business-style Word deliverable
Use scripts/intake.js for a fast intake template.
2) Gather source inputs
Collect whatever the user already has:
- account name
- Xiaohongshu homepage/search URL
- screenshots
- external links (podcasts, news, interviews)
- target output path
- whether they need Word / clickable TOC / business styling
3) Research with the source ladder
Read references/workflow.md for the full ladder.
Preferred tool pattern:
web_search for public discoverybrowser or browser-use for homepage/search-page inspectionweb_fetch for readable public pagesimage for screenshot analysisread for any local Markdown reports already created
4) Classify the archetype
Before deep analysis, make a preliminary archetype call:
- Run
node scripts/archetype.js <creator-name> to print the classification prompt
- Answer: Type A (荒诞美学) / Type B (共鸣命名) / Type C (现实策略) / Mixed
- The archetype frames the entire lens of the analysis
5) Build the account model
Extract and write down the five layers:
- Identity — who the creator is framed as
- Audience contract — why people follow them
- Topic system — what recurring problems/desires they cover
- Expression system — how titles and openings work, including any brand symbol
- Transferability — what another account can actually learn
6) Produce the deliverables
Always output the three standard DOCX files directly — no intermediate Markdown step needed:
| Output file | When to produce |
|---|
账号名-结构化总结报告.docx | Single creator analysis |
账号名-爆款选题公式.docx | Single creator topic formula |
选题公式学习-综合版.docx | Multi-creator comparison |
Use scripts/docx-plan.js <creator-name> to get the exact build command.
See references/workflow.md for the Word TOC fix checklist if needed.
Deliverables
Three standard output files. Always produce as .docx directly.
账号名-结构化总结报告.docx
Single creator full breakdown. Sections:
- Account snapshot
- Archetype classification + rationale
- Strategic positioning
- Audience and emotional contract
- Content pillars
- Title / hook system + brand symbol analysis
- Narrative structure
- Commercialization clues
- What to learn
- What not to blindly copy
- Conclusion
账号名-爆款选题公式.docx
Single creator topic formula. Sections:
- Why this creator produces strong topics (archetype-based)
- Total formula
- 3–6 recurring topic models
- Title formulas
- Body structure formulas
- Distribution / comment triggers
- How to migrate to another account
- 10–30 ready-to-use topic directions
选题公式学习-综合版.docx
Multi-creator comparison. Sections:
- Why compare these creators together
- Archetype map
- Shared foundations + key differences
- Hybrid formula
- Which path fits which use case
- 30 combined topic directions
- Final recommendation
Word Output
Run node scripts/docx-plan.js <creator-name> to get the exact build command.
Standard build: python3 build_docx6.py <creator-name>
If TOC / bookmark issues appear: run inspect_docx.py then fix_final2.py.
See references/workflow.md for the full fix checklist.
Output Files
Three files, always .docx:
账号名-结构化总结报告.docx账号名-爆款选题公式.docx选题公式学习-综合版.docx (comparison / multi-creator)
Use scripts/report-plan.js <creator-name> to confirm filenames.
Scripts
| Command | Purpose |
|---|
node scripts/intake.js | Print a structured intake template for a new analysis task |
node scripts/intake.js --json | Same as above, JSON format |
node scripts/archetype.js <creator-name> | Print the archetype classification prompt |
node scripts/archetype.js <creator-name> --quick | Print a quick-read archetype cheatsheet |
node scripts/report-plan.js <creator-name> | Print recommended deliverables and filenames |
node scripts/report-plan.js <A> <B> --mode compare | Print a comparison deliverable plan |
node scripts/docx-plan.js <creator-name> | Print Word generation plan using build_docx*.py |
Limitation Policy
Always state which situation applies:
- Homepage-level only: enough for strategic analysis, not enough for exact post-body claims
- Mixed-source analysis: Xiaohongshu public pages + third-party public clues
- Deep-dive mode: based on user-provided screenshots / links / transcripts
If blocked by risk control, say so and continue with the strongest available public evidence.
What Good Output Looks Like
A strong output is:
- structured
- archetype-aware (names and reasons the type)
- evidence-aware (grades sources)
- strategically useful
- honest about access limits
- directly reusable in future reports
Avoid vague praise, empty creator admiration, or unsupported claims about hidden metrics.
References
Read only when needed:
references/workflow.md — detailed evidence ladder, execution runbook, Word TOC fix guidereferences/templates.md — report templates, archetype-specific section structures, naming patterns
Proven Analyses Archive
Three full analyses have been completed and archived in:
openclaw_cosmo/afa/小红书分析与工作流归档/01-分析报告与选题公式/
| Archetype | Type | Key Insight |
|---|
| 荒诞美学型 | Type A | 品牌符号 + 反差标题 + 哲思轻量化输出 |
| 共鸣命名型 | Type B | 私人经历→公共命题，给模糊状态命名 |
| 现实策略型 | Type C | 困境→说破→规则→策略→爽感 |
These archetypes are the ground truth for the classification system.
Version: 2.1.0 · Created: 2026-04-08 · Updated: 2026-04-09
