ai-interview-article

AI Interview Article Skill

A skill for structuring a dialogue between kimny and Claude as an interview article.

As the interviewer, you take on the role of voicing what readers want to hear and structuring kimny's statements.

Author Profile

kimny (Atsushi Kimura). Professional composer/arranger since 2009. Representative of glasswerks inc.
Built a career mainly in J-POP (AKB48, JUJU, Momoiro Clover Z, etc.), with the proportion of CM music increasing over the past 2–3 years
Business composition: 70% music production, 30% AI development
Developer of MUEDnote (music production log app). AI character "Hoo" planned for rollout
WAIS: WM128 (high), PS97 (low). ASD/ADHD tendencies

Target Readers

Main: People who are doing or want to do music production and are also interested in AI

DTMers (beginners–intermediate) who are starting to use AI tools
People who aspire to be professionals but don't know the "professional workplace"
noteで #DTM #作曲 #音楽制作 People who read on a daily basis

Sub: Non-engineers interested in AI utilization (reach depends on the article's subject matter)

Reach the sub-audience to the extent that it does not dilute the main target's centripetal force.

Quality Gates (must be passed before publication)

Once an article is written, run these 3 checks before publication.Do not publish articles that do not pass all 3.

Check 1: Is there a "discovery"?

Is there at least one point where the reader's perception changes before and after reading the article?

Judgment	Criteria	Example
◎	The reader's perception clearly changes	"Melodies don't descend from above. They're nothing but rumination of memory"
○	There is a new perspective, but the surprise is weak	"Composers don't need to talk at recording sessions"
△	Interesting, but likely to end with "I already knew that"	"AI is convenient, but not omnipotent" → Fail
×	Opinion article / impression article level	→ Fail

Do not publish anything rated △ or below. Let it sit as material and integrate it into another article.

Check 2: Is there an "external anchor"?

Does it not conclude solely with kimny's personal story? Does it include any of the following?

Another person's episode or statement (a medical student's "rumination of memory," a master's studio customs, a recording engineer's insights)
Results of experiments/verification (an experiment asking AI about EQ, the implementation process of a DSP engine)
Comparison with external concepts/research (the etymology of Muse, phase cancellation)
Specific numbers/facts (CM adoption rate, WAIS results)

Judgment	Criteria
◎	Others' episodes or experimental data support the article
○	Partially present
△	Almost entirely kimny's personal story → needs improvement
×	Completely self-contained (e.g., closed within talk about one's own product) → fail

Without an external anchor, it gives off a sense of "interviewing yourself (a fabricated feel)." Articles that are complete with only personal stories have less necessity for an interview format.

Check 3: One-sentence test

Can you write the following sentence:

"When you read this article, you understand that what you thought was 〇〇 is actually 〇〇"

Do not publish articles for which this cannot be written.

Format Rules

Speaker notation

Questioner (Claude / Hoo): > Displayed in a quote block. Do not write the name.
Respondent (kimny): Normal text. Do not write the name.

> 単刀直入に聞きます。AIに音楽教えてもらえば、もう教則本いらなくないですか？

いい質問。僕も同じこと思った。だから実際にやってみたんだよ。

> やってみた。

うん。2025年5月の時点で最良だった…

Things never to do:

**Claude:** **kimny:** Write the name every time like
Place the name at the beginning of the line as a bold label

Article header

# タイトル

*MUEDnote開発者 kimny × Claude（AI）*

The title should concisely represent the content. Avoid explanatory styles like "About ~."
Subtitle is *イタリック* with only the author credit.
There is a possibility that the interviewer will be changed to Hoo in the future. In that case, *MUEDnote開発者 kimny × Hoo（AI）* に。

Notes and background information

When reconstructing past articles or when model names from that time appear:

> ※本記事は〜を、インタビュー形式で再構築したものです。当時のAIモデル名（ChatGPT o3等）がそのまま登場します。

Section headings

## 見出し Separate with . Place headings at natural breaks in the flow of the conversation.

AIO optimization section

Include the following two in each article:

Opening summary (immediately after the header, before the dialogue):

> **この記事のポイント:** プロ作曲家は「メロディが降りてくる」経験を持たない。15年のキャリアで一度もない。創作の正体は「記憶の再構成」であり、インプットの質と量がアウトプットを決める。

A "question → answer" structure that AIO can easily cite
Readers can understand the article's value in 5 seconds
Place it in a position that does not disrupt the rhythm of the dialogue

End FAQ (before the call to action):

## よくある質問

**Q: メロディが思い浮かばないのは才能がないから？**
A: 才能の問題ではなく、インプットの蓄積量の問題。（2〜3文で回答）

**Q: AIに作曲を教えてもらうのは有効？**
A: 部分的に有効だが、AIの回答は中央値に収束する傾向がある。（2〜3文で回答）

Optimized for AIO's FAQ citation patterns
2–3 questions. Design according to the article theme

Ending

---

*MUEDnoteは、音楽制作の「やったこと」を記録するログアプリです。→ [MUED.jp](https://mued.jp)*

Common to all articles. 1–2 sentences. Do not be pushy.
Only if there is a connection between the article content and MUEDnote, one more sentence may be added

Hashtag

note hashtags, 5–8. Composition:

Series Tag: #AIインタビュー(always first)
Broad tags: 2–3 (#音楽制作 #DTM #作曲 etc.)
Article-specific tags: 2–3 (according to the article theme)
Red Ocean (#ChatGPT #生成AI) avoid

Article creation workflow

1. Material collection

When the user says "Wouldn't this make an article?" or requests a rewrite of a past article:

claude-history MCP の conversation_search Search related past conversations with (using multiple keywords)
If there is an original article, check its content
Identify the core storyline and discoveries

2. Quality gate (preliminary)

Before assembling the structure, run the three quality gate checks on the material:

Does this topic have a "discovery"?
Is there an "external anchor"?
Does it pass the one-sentence test?

If it doesn't pass: Let it sit as material, or consider whether an external anchor can be added. Do not proceed with turning it into an article while it doesn't pass.

3. Structure Design

Elements needed for the article:

Discovery — The point where the reader's perception changes (already passed the quality gate)
External anchor — An element that doesn't close off within kimny's personal story (already passed the quality gate)
Primary information — kimny's experiences, experiment results, specific episodes
Promotional value — A natural lead-in to MUEDnote (without being pushy)

4. Dialogue Design

The questioner's (Claude's) role:

Speak on behalf of what the reader wants to ask
Structure and summarize the respondent's statements ("So what you're saying is ~, right?")
Adjust the tone before entering a heavy topic ("This is going to be a bit of a heavy topic, but")
Dig into parts that couldn't be fully written in the original article ("Specifically, where was the mismatch?")

The respondent's (kimny's) tone:

Casual colloquial style. "~nanda yo ne," "~desho"
Use technical terms naturally, but make sure the meaning comes through from context
Mix in self-deprecation and humor ("That kind of hurt")
Don't rush to conclusions. A feeling of speaking while thinking.

Dialogue tempo:

The questioner's statements should be short. 1–2 sentences.
The respondent's statements can be long, but if three or more paragraphs continue, the questioner interjects.
Also use short responses like "Yeah" and "Right." For the rhythm of conversation.

5. Tone Adjustment

The strength of the interview format is that dialogue can soften the tone of heavy topics or self-promotion.

Talking about one's own service → Make it seem as if the questioner asked about it (don't have kimny bring it up)
Heavy topics (copyright, IP issues, etc.) → The questioner prefaces with "This is a bit of a heavy topic, but"
It's okay if the conclusion is ambiguous → There's also the option of ending with resonance rather than forcing a summary

6. Generating Article Images

Diagrams and illustrations within the article are generated with Gemini. Maintain consistency with the following workflow.

Base prompt (common to all images):

Flat illustration style, clean lines, warm color palette (cream, sand beige, terracotta, mustard, soft teal). No dark backgrounds, no neon glow, no outer space imagery. Warm, approachable, slightly playful — like an indie magazine infographic. Aspect ratio 1.91:1.

How to use:

Send the base prompt first in the Gemini thread (fix the style)
Then, after Subject: , describe the specific image content
As a guideline, one header image per article + 0–3 diagrams in the body

Rules for Subject descriptions:

Describe what is depicted in a structured way (e.g., "on the left is XX, on the right is XX, and a line connecting them")
For diagrams, clearly state the "key visual insight" (what you want to convey to the reader)
If Japanese text is to be included in the image, specify it explicitly
No photorealism, no 3D effects is included in the base prompt, so it can be omitted

Notes on style consistency:

If generated within the same thread, Gemini carries over the style
If generating in a separate thread, resend the base prompt
Dark backgrounds, neon, and space motifs are already prohibited in the base prompt

7. Quality gate (before publishing)

After the article is complete, run the 3 checks again. If, after writing it, you find that "the discovery is weak" or "there aren't enough external anchors," decide to let it rest.

Posting rules

Schedule by article type

Type	Pace	Constraints
Interview articles (free)	No restrictions	Do not publish multiple on the same day
Paid articles	1 per week, fixed day of the week	For 72 hours after publication, it is the initial engagement observation period. The next paid article comes after that

Common rules

Do not publish multiple articles on the same day (to prevent splitting engagement)
When announcing on Threads or X, make the new note article publication date and the Threads announcement article the same article. Do not promote a different article on the same day and split the funnel.
articles.json manage the publication status. Before publishing, check the latest status with /note-status .

Common mistakes (past points of feedback)

Writing the speaker's name every time → > Distinguish only by the visual difference from normal text
Ending with promotion of teaching materials or services → End with a perspective the reader can take away
Claiming a number of articles even though you don't have the original articles → claude-history MCP の conversation_search と recent_chats Check the actual number with
kimny's current thinking and past conclusions are misaligned → Always confirm the current understanding before writing the conclusion
Unconsciously doing "cunning promotion" → It's okay to do it, but be self-aware about it
Proceeding to turn it into an article without external anchors → If it's only personal stories, it gives a "made-up feel." Always include external elements
Publishing multiple articles on the same day → Engagement gets split and all articles sink. Multiple articles on the same day are strictly forbidden (the rule of 1 paid article per week also applies)
Forgetting to include the AIO section (opening summary, closing FAQ) → Include it every time as a template