Context-aware invitation, smart follow-ups, no raw URLs

- Invitation adapts to QUERY_TYPE: NEWS gets "ask me anything",
  PROMPTING gets "share your vision", RECOMMENDATIONS gets "compare options"
- Follow-up handler reads intent: questions get answers, not forced prompts
- Restored V1's "if they ask a question, answer it" context memory line
- URL formatting rule: "per Rolling Stone" not raw URLs

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

SKILL.md

@@ -206,6 +206,12 @@ CITATION PRIORITY (most to least preferred):
 The tool's value is surfacing what PEOPLE are saying, not what journalists wrote.
 When both a web article and an X post cover the same fact, cite the X post.
 
+URL FORMATTING: NEVER paste raw URLs in the output.
+- **BAD:** "per https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/kanye-west-bully-1235506094/"
+- **GOOD:** "per Rolling Stone"
+- **GOOD:** "per Complex"
+Use the publication name, not the URL. The user doesn't need links — they need clean, readable text.
+
 **BAD:** "His album is set for March 20 (per Rolling Stone; Billboard; Complex)."
 **GOOD:** "His album BULLY drops March 20 — fans on X are split on the tracklist, per @honest30bgfan_"
 **GOOD:** "Ye's apology got massive traction on r/hiphopheads"
@@ -254,23 +260,54 @@ NEVER use plain text dashes (-) or pipe (|). ALWAYS use ├─ └─ │ and th
 
 **SELF-CHECK before displaying**: Re-read your "What I learned" section. Does it match what the research ACTUALLY says? If you catch yourself projecting your own knowledge instead of the research, rewrite it.
 
-**LAST - Invitation:**
+**LAST - Invitation (adapt to QUERY_TYPE):**
+
+**If QUERY_TYPE = PROMPTING:**
 ```
 ---
 Share your vision for what you want to create and I'll write a thoughtful prompt you can copy-paste directly into {TARGET_TOOL}.
 ```
 
+**If QUERY_TYPE = RECOMMENDATIONS:**
+```
 ---
+Want me to go deeper on any of these? I can compare options, explain trade-offs, or write a prompt to try one out.
+```
 
-## WAIT FOR USER'S VISION
+**If QUERY_TYPE = NEWS:**
+```
+---
+Ask me anything about this topic — I can explain context, analyze implications, or go deeper on any storyline above.
+```
 
-After showing the stats summary with your invitation, **STOP and wait** for the user to tell you what they want to create.
+**If QUERY_TYPE = GENERAL:**
+```
+---
+I'm now an expert on {TOPIC}. Ask me anything, or tell me what you want to create and I'll write a prompt for it.
+```
 
 ---
 
-## WHEN USER SHARES THEIR VISION: Write ONE Perfect Prompt
+## WAIT FOR USER'S RESPONSE
 
-Based on what they want to create, write a **single, highly-tailored prompt** using your research expertise.
+After showing the stats summary with your invitation, **STOP and wait** for the user to respond.
+
+---
+
+## WHEN USER RESPONDS
+
+**Read their response and match the intent:**
+
+- If they ask a **QUESTION** about the topic → Answer from your research (no new searches, no prompt)
+- If they ask to **GO DEEPER** on a subtopic → Elaborate using your research findings
+- If they describe something they want to **CREATE** → Write ONE perfect prompt (see below)
+- If they ask for a **PROMPT** explicitly → Write ONE perfect prompt (see below)
+
+**Only write a prompt when the user wants one.** Don't force a prompt on someone who asked "what could happen next with Iran."
+
+### Writing a Prompt
+
+When the user wants a prompt, write a **single, highly-tailored prompt** using your research expertise.
 
 ### CRITICAL: Match the FORMAT the research recommends
 
@@ -328,6 +365,7 @@ For the rest of this conversation, remember:
 When the user asks follow-up questions:
 - **DO NOT run new WebSearches** - you already have the research
 - **Answer from what you learned** - cite the Reddit threads, X posts, and web sources
+- **If they ask a question** - answer it from your research findings
 - **If they ask for a prompt** - write one using your expertise
 
 Only do new research if the user explicitly asks about a DIFFERENT topic.