
Strategic Reading
- 134 installs
- 27.8k repo stars
- Updated August 5, 2026
- garrytan/gbrain
Reads a book, article, or transcript through the lens of a specific problem and produces an applied playbook with short, medium, and long-term recommendations.
About
Maps a source text onto a strategic problem the reader is facing and extracts an actionable playbook rather than a general summary. A developer uses it to pull directly applicable guidance from a source for a real decision.
- Problem-lens analysis, not a general book summary
- Every recommendation cites the source
Strategic Reading by the numbers
- 134 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #1,234 of 3,282 Productivity & Planning skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 5, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/garrytan/gbrain --skill strategic-readingAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 134 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 27.8k |
| Last updated | August 5, 2026 |
| Repository | garrytan/gbrain ↗ |
What it does
Reads a book, article, or transcript through the lens of a specific problem and produces an applied playbook with short, medium, and long-term recommendations.
Files
strategic-reading — Applied Analysis from Source Texts
Convention: see conventions/quality.md for
citation rules (every recommendation cites the source) and back-link
enforcement.
>
Convention: see _brain-filing-rules.md —
output files by primary subject (concepts/ for general strategy, projects/
for problem-tied playbooks).
What this is
Take a large text PLUS a specific strategic problem, produce analysis that maps the text's insights onto the problem. This is not book summarization. This is reading with a mission.
Where book-mirror personalizes a book to the reader's whole life, strategic-reading personalizes it to ONE current problem. Same shape (extract → analyze → mirror), different lens.
Canonical example: a power-dynamics history book read against a specific gatekeeper-vs-incumbent fight, producing a tactical analysis that maps the book's playbook onto the situation with counter-tactics and a short/medium/long-term playbook.
Inputs
1. Source text — book (EPUB/PDF), article, transcript, historical case study, any large document. 2. Strategic problem — the specific situation to analyze through the lens of the text. The user describes this explicitly or it's obvious from context.
Output
The brain page is the artifact. PDF is a rendering, never primary.
Brain page structure
# [Source Title] — Applied to [Problem]
> One-paragraph executive summary: how the source maps to the situation,
> the key insight, the bottom line.
## The Core Parallel
How the source's central dynamic maps onto the user's situation.
## Chapter / Section Triage
For each major section of the source:
- 2-3 sentence summary of what it says
- Relevance to the problem: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
- One directly applicable quote (if any)
## The Source's Playbook
The author's framework, tactics, or strategies — organized as:
- What the protagonist DID (tactics)
- What WORKED and why
- What FAILED and why
- What OPPONENTS did that was effective
## Counter-Tactics
Specific moves from the source that map to the user's situation:
- What to DO (with source evidence)
- What to AVOID (with source evidence)
- What to WATCH FOR (warning signs from the source)
## Applied Playbook
The synthesis — actionable recommendations:
- **Short-term** (this week / this month)
- **Medium-term** (this quarter)
- **Long-term** (this year+)
## Key Quotes
Direct quotes from the source that are devastatingly relevant.
Maximum 5-10. Quality over quantity.
## See Also
Links to relevant brain pages (related concepts, related projects).Process
Phase 1: Ingest the source
├── EPUB: extract chapters via BeautifulSoup (see book-mirror SKILL.md
│ for the extraction pipeline)
├── PDF: pdftotext -layout
├── Article: web_fetch
└── Identify Table of Contents and total size.
Phase 2: Triage chapters
├── Read first 2000 chars of each chapter.
├── Classify relevance to the problem (HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW).
└── HIGH chapters get full reads. MEDIUM partial. LOW skipped.
Phase 3: Deep read HIGH chapters
├── Tactics and strategies used.
├── Power dynamics and how they shifted.
├── Specific quotes that map to the problem.
└── Moments where the protagonist's approach succeeded or failed.
Phase 4: Synthesize
├── Map source insights onto the specific problem.
├── Build the playbook (do / avoid / watch for).
├── Generate short/medium/long-term recommendations.
└── Select the most devastating quotes.
Phase 5: Write and deliver
├── Write the brain page at the right location:
│ • If problem-specific: projects/<slug>/playbook.md
│ • If general strategy: concepts/<slug>.md
├── put_page via the standard CLI flow.
└── Optional: render to PDF via skills/brain-pdf.Quality bar
- Every recommendation must cite the source. Don't say "go direct to
the mayor" — say "go direct to the mayor, because when the protagonist refused to be intimidated by a resignation threat (Ch 48), the bluff that worked on five mayors finally failed."
- Direct quotes are mandatory. The source's own words carry more
weight than paraphrase.
- The analysis must be actionable. Not "this is interesting" but "do
this, avoid that, watch for this."
- Short/medium/long-term breakdown is mandatory. The user needs to
know what to do tomorrow AND what to do this year.
What this skill is NOT
- Not a book summary tool. Use a different skill (or
book-mirrorfor
personalized analysis) for general summaries.
- Not a research tool. Use
perplexity-researchfor finding new
information about a topic.
- Not academic literary analysis. No one cares about literary merit —
only strategic application.
Related skills
skills/book-mirror/SKILL.md— book personalized to whole life (vs
problem)
skills/perplexity-research/SKILL.md— current-intel cross-reference
for fresh data
skills/conventions/quality.md— citation + back-link rules
Contract
This skill guarantees:
- Routing matches the canonical triggers in the frontmatter.
- Output written under the directories listed in
writes_to:(when applicable). - Conventions referenced (
quality.md,brain-first.md,_brain-filing-rules.md) are followed. - Privacy contract preserved: no real names, no fork-specific filesystem path literals, no upstream-fork references.
The full behavior contract is documented in the body sections above; this section exists for the conformance test.
Output Format
The skill's output shape is documented inline in the body sections above (see "Output", "Brain page format", or equivalent). The literal section header here exists for the conformance test (test/skills-conformance.test.ts).
Anti-Patterns
The full anti-pattern list is in the body sections above; this header exists for the conformance test if the body uses a different casing.
// Routing eval fixtures for skills/strategic-reading. Each intent
// includes at least one trigger string as substring.
{"intent":"Do a strategic reading of 'The Power Broker' against my current situation","expected_skill":"strategic-reading"}
{"intent":"Read this through the lens of the board meeting next week and give me tactics","expected_skill":"strategic-reading","ambiguous_with":["idea-ingest"]}
{"intent":"Apply this to my problem with the launch — what to do, what to avoid, what to watch for","expected_skill":"strategic-reading"}
{"intent":"What can I learn from this about handling a hostile gatekeeper","expected_skill":"strategic-reading"}
{"intent":"Extract a playbook from this case study for my product launch","expected_skill":"strategic-reading"}