zhihu-post

name	zhihu-post
description	Write, refine, and validate a Chinese technical blog post for Zhihu (知乎). This skill should be used before drafting a long-form Chinese technical article — or when the user says "写博客", "知乎文章", "zhihu post", "write for zhihu".
disable-model-invocation	true

Zhihu Technical Blog Post

Write, iteratively refine, and validate a Chinese technical blog post formatted for Zhihu (知乎), which supports standard Markdown with LaTeX math blocks.

When to Use

• Writing a technical blog post in Chinese based on research, exploration, or project work
• Converting a conversation or exploration session into a publishable article
• Refining an existing Chinese blog draft for publication

When NOT to Use

• Short Q&A or informal notes (overkill)
• English-only publications
• Non-technical creative writing

Workflow

Phase 1: Draft

1. Outline first. Identify the narrative arc: problem, exploration, findings, solution, takeaways. Use numbered top-level sections (## 一、, ## 二、, ...) for Chinese convention.
2. Write in natural Chinese. Not translated English. Avoid translationese (翻译腔). Technical terms can stay in English where that's the norm (e.g., "prompt caching", "TTL", "GrowthBook").
3. Show the thought process. Technical blog readers value the exploration journey — dead ends, surprising discoveries, pivots. Don't just present conclusions.
4. Include quantitative evidence. Tables, cost models, formulas. Use $$...$$ for LaTeX math blocks (Zhihu renders these natively).
5. Code snippets should be real. Include file paths and line numbers when referencing source code. Readers should be able to verify.

Phase 2: Attribution & Disclosure

6. AI authorship disclosure. If the article was written by or with Claude Code, state this clearly near the top (e.g., in a blockquote under the title). Describe the division of labor: who posed the questions, who did the research, who wrote the prose, who reviewed.
7. Project references. If there's a related open-source repo, config, or tool, add a dedicated section near the end. Be specific about what the repo contains — don't just drop a link. List the key files/directories and what each provides.

Phase 3: Clear-Eye Review

Read the full article as if you're a stranger seeing it for the first time. Check for:

8. Factual consistency. Do numbers match across sections? If section 3 derives K < 11.5 and section 5 says "10 iterations", is the connection explained? Every concrete number should trace back to its derivation.
9. Terminology precision. Did you say "won't trigger tool calls" when you mean "won't trigger long-running tool calls"? Check every absolute claim.
10. Cross-section coherence. Do later sections contradict or subtly conflict with earlier ones? Check that rounding (e.g., "~57 min" vs "~58 min") is consistent.
11. Domain leakage. If the article is meant to be generic, check that domain-specific jargon (e.g., "train-test mismatch", "回测") hasn't leaked in. If domain-specific, ensure it's consistent throughout.
12. Heading accuracy. Does each section heading accurately describe the content? A section titled "which operations block X" shouldn't contain material about behavioral risks that aren't blocking.

Phase 4: Iterate

13. Fix each issue found in Phase 3. One edit per issue, don't batch.
14. Re-read after every batch of fixes. Edits can introduce new inconsistencies. At least one full re-read after all fixes are applied.

Phase 5: Validate Markdown

15. Syntax check. Run through markdown-it (with table extension) and verify no parse errors:

uv run --with markdown-it-py python -c "
import markdown_it, re
md = markdown_it.MarkdownIt('commonmark', {'html': True}).enable('table')
with open('FILEPATH') as f:
    text = f.read()
html = md.render(text)
tables = len(re.findall(r'<table>', html))
headings = len(re.findall(r'<h[1-6]>', html))
code_blocks = len(re.findall(r'<pre>', html))
latex_pairs = len(re.findall(r'\\\$\\\$', text)) // 2
print(f'Tables: {tables}, Headings: {headings}, Code blocks: {code_blocks}, LaTeX blocks: {latex_pairs}')
print('OK' if tables >= 0 and headings > 0 else 'WARNING: check output')
"

16. Element count sanity. Compare rendered element counts against what you expect. 0 tables when the source has pipe lines = rendering failure.
17. Zhihu-specific checks:
    • $$...$$ LaTeX blocks render on Zhihu (standard)
    • Inline $...$ also works on Zhihu
    • Tables must have header + separator row (|---|---|)
    • Zhihu strips raw HTML tags — don't rely on <details>, <summary>, etc.
    • Image links must be absolute URLs (Zhihu re-hosts images on upload)

Phase 6: Final Output

18. Report to user: file path, word count, section count, and any remaining caveats (e.g., "LaTeX requires Zhihu's math mode to be enabled").