Talk Stage 3: Concepts

Talk Stage 3: Concepts

Builds an exhaustive catalogue of all identifiable concepts in the source material. Each concept is numbered, categorized, and scored for its talk potential.

When to Use This Skill

• After Stage 1 (and Stage 2 if REX mode)
• Before Stage 4 (Position needs the concept catalogue)
• When you want a structured inventory of what's available before choosing an angle

What This Skill Does

• **Reads the summary** — loads `{slug}-summary.md`
• **Reads the timeline** (if available) — enriches scoring with verified dates
• **Extracts concepts** — full scan of the source material
• **Categorizes** — assigns each concept to a domain category
• **Scores** — HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW for talk potential
• **Optional repo enrichment** — if repo_path is provided, analyzes AI config concepts
• **Writes output files**

Input

• `talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-summary.md` (required)
• `talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-timeline.md` (optional — enriches REX concepts)
• `repo_path` (optional — for config/infrastructure concept extraction)

Output

• `talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-concepts.md` (main catalogue)
• `talks/{YYYY}-{slug}-concepts-enriched.md` (if repo_path provided)

Scoring Criteria

HIGH — Strong potential

• Demonstrable live or with a screenshot
• Counter-intuitive or surprising (triggers a reaction)
• Associated with verifiable numbers
• Concrete and actionable (explainable in 30 seconds)
• Differentiator vs other talks on the same topic

MEDIUM — Moderate potential

• Useful but expected (not surprising)
• Missing concrete proof or numbers
• Too specific to one particular context
• Needs too much explanation for a 30-min talk

LOW — Weak potential

• Too abstract or philosophical without concrete grounding
• Already heavily covered by other speakers
• Requires specific technical background
• Hard to illustrate in a slide

**Scoring discipline**: Max 30% HIGH. If everything is HIGH, nothing is.

Standard Categories

| Category | Description | |----------|-------------| | **Architecture** | Technical decisions, stack, structural patterns | | **Tooling** | Tools, workflows, automations | | **Philosophy** | Principles, mindsets, approaches | | **Workflow** | Work processes, habits | | **Knowledge Transfer** | Onboarding, team, knowledge sharing | | **Problems** | Obstacles encountered, trade-offs | | **Open Source** | Contributions, sharing, community | | **AI Config** | AI configuration, profiles, knowledge feeding | | **AI Infrastructure** | Agents, skills, hooks, commands | | **AI Quality** | Review, tests, anti-patterns | | **AI Security** | Security hooks, guardrails | | **Optimization** | Performance, cost/token reduction |

Adapt or create categories if the talk has domain-specific areas.

Output Format

concepts.md

# Key Concepts — {provisional title}

**Date**: {date}
**Source**: {source path} × Summary × Timeline (if available)

---

## Concept table

| # | Concept | Category | Short description | Talk potential |
|---|---------|----------|------------------|----------------|
| 1 | **{Concept name}** | {Category} | {1-2 concrete sentences} | HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW |
...

---

## Category breakdown

| Category | Count | HIGH concepts | Examples |
|----------|-------|---------------|---------|
| {category} | {n} | {n} | {examples} |
...
| **TOTAL** | **{N}** | **{N HIGH}** | |

---

## Recommendations for positioning

{3-5 sentences on concept clusters that could form the talk's acts.
Which HIGH concepts reinforce each other? What narrative arc is emerging?}

concepts-enriched.md (if repo available)

Same structure but focused on what the repo analysis reveals:

• Specialized agents (count, size, roles)
• Invocable skills (catalogue, domains covered)
• System hooks (events, logic)
• Modular config (profiles, modules, pipeline)
• Project-specific code patterns

For each enriched concept, include:

• **Exact source**: file and approximate line
• **Demo-able**: yes/no (can it be shown in a slide or live?)

Anti-patterns

• Creating overly granular concepts (one feature = one concept max)
• Scoring HIGH by default — be selective
• Omitting LOW concepts (they're useful in positioning as "angles to avoid")
• Duplicating very similar concepts (merge them instead)
• Analyzing repo code if the repo isn't accessible

Validation Checklist

• [ ] Minimum 15 concepts identified (20+ for REX with repo)
• [ ] Each concept has a 1-2 sentence concrete description
• [ ] Scores are calibrated (not all HIGH, not all LOW)
• [ ] Categories cover the summary's themes
• [ ] Positioning recommendations present
• [ ] Files saved to correct paths

Tips

• The concept catalogue is what Stage 4 (Position) draws from — the richer it is, the better the angle choices
• LOW concepts are valuable: they define the boundaries of what NOT to put in the talk
• If two concepts feel very similar, merge them — a smaller, sharper list beats a long diluted one

Related

• [Stage 1: Extract](../stage-1-extract/SKILL.md) — prerequisite
• [Stage 2: Research](../stage-2-research/SKILL.md) — provides timeline (REX)
• [Stage 4: Position](../stage-4-position/SKILL.md) — reads this catalogue
• [Orchestrator](../orchestrator/SKILL.md)