Official Document Writing Suite

The problem it addresses

Official-document drafting often gets stuck between 'the points are clear' and 'the draft is ready to issue': the wrong document type, mixed upward and downward direction, facts blended with judgments, unsupported policy citations, non-compliant GB/T 9704 formatting, and AI-like prose that lacks factual density. This skill turns scattered notes, leader intent, and source materials into reviewable, issuable internal-government documents, while separating drafting, review, polishing, formatting, and export into an explicit workflow.

Core workflow

The skill first routes the request by task: drafting, revision, review, formatting, export, material collection, or policy research. Formal drafting follows eight steps: intake and requirement confirmation, document-type selection, policy research, outline generation, paragraph expansion, Anti-AI QA, layout validation, and delivery.
- Document type: distinguishes requests for instructions, reports, notices, letters, replies, minutes, and others, preventing issues such as reports carrying approval requests or notices using an overly imperative tone.
- Fact ledger: separates confirmed facts, user judgments, items to verify, and suggested wording; when facts are missing, it uses placeholders such as [Issuing Agency] and [Date] rather than inventing policies, document numbers, data, or leader names.
- Policy basis: for regulations, leader speeches, or meeting conclusions, it builds a citation ledger and cross-validates authoritative sources before drafting.
- Quality checks: scores seven dimensions—fact density, judgment strength, sentence rhythm, abstraction control, paragraph function, document-type fit, and actionable closing—and requires revision when the score is below 80.
- Layout output: validates titles, document numbers, hierarchical numbering, dates, attachment notes, and other GB/T 9704 rules, then checks fonts and generates Word output.

Boundaries

It fits the 15 statutory document types, routine administrative materials, policy interpretation, internal communications, and petition responses in a government tone. It is not suitable for highly political party or disciplinary writing, pure legal instruments, external marketing copy, or final review of classified and major-decision language, which must still be approved by the responsible reviewer.