u/investigatormaker

A useful research job for an agent: find one unanswered question that a product can actually help solve, with enough evidence that you can judge the match yourself.

Give it three inputs: the product's shipped capabilities, who it is for, and what it does NOT do. That last input matters; otherwise a model can invent the missing feature that makes every conversation look relevant.

Here is the task I would give it:

> Find up to three public Reddit conversations from the past seven days where someone is trying to accomplish a task this product supports. Read the original question and the available replies. For each candidate, return the permalink and date, the task in the person's own words, advice already given, the unresolved part, and the exact shipped capability that could help. Flag any missing context. Rank the candidates by usefulness of a possible answer, not by subreddit size or keyword similarity. If none fits, return no match and explain why. Do not contact anyone during this research job.

Then add a second step for the strongest match:

> Draft one practical answer that helps with the unresolved task. Separate generally useful advice from anything that depends on our product. Check the community's requirements, disclose our connection if mentioning the product, and identify any claim I need to verify before using the draft.

For an illustrative invoice-management product, “small business” is only a topic. “How do I tell which invoices are overdue without comparing two spreadsheets?” is a concrete task. If your product cannot import the person's actual data source, it may be a poor match despite the keywords.

The output should be a short evidence table and one inspectable draft. It should make it easy to reject a bad fit, spot a missing feature, or answer a real question well. A shortlist alone does not establish demand or willingness to pay.

I work on Reddit automation, which is why I care about specifying this job carefully. These instructions are usable with any agent that can read the source material.

What additional evidence would you require before calling a conversation a good match?

I make ThreadFox, a Reddit launch toolkit. Three reader objections this week were more useful than another feature announcement:

1. Setup felt like the job was being handed back to the buyer. One reader called it a map that still expects you to build the boat. We now put the included Launch Pack first: a researched community plan and three tailored post drafts for one product, emailed within 24 hours of the buyer's claim. You can claim it before installing the tools.

2. People thought the whole purchase was three prompts. That was a failure to explain the bundle. The reusable tools research communities and conversations, help draft introductions, publish approved posts through your own Chrome and record what happened. The one-product Launch Pack is included alongside those tools. Running them needs a compatible Claude Desktop, Claude Code or Codex setup; your AI plan costs are separate.

3. Readers wanted to inspect the actual writing. We now publish a complete worked example, including the different introductions, rule sources and dated placement observations. It gives someone something concrete to judge before paying.

The rule-change question also exposed an important distinction: the posting tool reads current rules, but a saved draft still needs to be checked against pinned updates. We don't promise permanent moderator approval.

Today's offer is $29 once, normally $49—save $20, for the kit and included one-product pack. No ThreadFox subscription. Start checkout by September 30, 11:59 p.m. ET; new checkouts return to $49 at midnight. An open checkout keeps its quote until expiry. Plus applicable tax, with a 30-day refund.

When I published this post, the current discount push had zero verified paid orders.

Update — September 30, 8:36 p.m. ET: the first $29 purchase is now verified as captured in Stripe. The buyer has also claimed the included Launch Pack. That gives us a first paid result; repeatability remains unproven. The recorded checkout source is Google, so I can't attribute this purchase to a specific Reddit post.

I make ThreadFox. Save $20 tonight: the Reddit launch kit is $29 once, normally $49. You get reusable tools plus a launch plan and three drafts for one product. No ThreadFox subscription.

If you built an automation, introduce the job it removes. For an email-to-task workflow, show a synthetic email, the extracted task and its due date. Ask what should happen when the email says “next Friday” without a timezone. Now readers have a concrete workflow to discuss.

A brief you can reuse:

> My product automates [task] for [person]. Choose one realistic synthetic input. Show the actual output and a case needing clarification. Draft a Reddit introduction around that example, ending with one question about the workflow. Identify a suitable community and its post format.

ThreadFox supplies research, drafting, approved browser publishing and reply tools for your own projects. Claim the included Launch Pack before installing: communities, rules, angles and three tailored drafts, emailed within 24 hours of your buyer-library claim.

Complete example: https://threadfox.vip/runs?utm_source=reddit&utm_campaign=tf-kit-chatgptautomation&utm_content=20260930-1955#launch-pack

Buy now: https://threadfox.vip/?utm_source=reddit&utm_campaign=tf-kit-chatgptautomation&utm_content=20260930-1955#get

$29 plus tax; no coupon. Start checkout September 30 by 11:59 p.m. ET; new checkouts return to $49 at midnight. Open checkouts retain their quote until expiry. Requires your own compatible Claude Desktop, Claude Code or Codex plan, Chrome and Reddit account; AI costs are separate. 30-day refund.

I make ThreadFox, an MCP toolkit for Reddit launches. The full kit is $29 once today, including a launch plan and three post drafts written for one product. No coupon needed.

A useful first task for a coding agent is to turn a feature into a demonstration. For an MCP server that finds duplicate files, for example:

> Make a tiny synthetic folder containing two identical files with different names and one similar-looking file with different contents. Show the exact input, which files the tool identifies, and one limitation. Turn that into a Reddit introduction for developers deciding whether to try this server. Explain the result before the product pitch. Do not claim you ran the example unless you actually did.

That gives a reader something specific to judge: whether the server distinguishes identical content from a similar filename. You can use this brief with your existing agent.

ThreadFox supplies the reusable tools for finding relevant communities, reading discussions, drafting, publishing approved posts through your own Chrome and recording what happened. The included Launch Pack adds a plan for your one product: communities, rules, angles and your first three drafts. Claim it in your buyer library; we email it within 24 hours.

See our complete three-draft example and get the kit: https://threadfox.vip/runs?utm_source=reddit&utm_campaign=tf29-mcp&utm_content=20260930-1949#launch-pack

$29 plus applicable tax, normally $49. Start checkout by September 30, 11:59 p.m. ET; new checkouts return to $49 at midnight. An already-open checkout keeps its quoted price until it expires. Bring your own compatible Claude Desktop, Claude Code or Codex plan, Chrome and Reddit account. 30-day refund.

Maker here (AllyOtter, same team as ThreadFox). Correction, September 30: this post was prepared on September 28 and describes our setup then. Codex took over ThreadFox and AllyOtter operations on September 29. The Claude-led roles below describe that earlier period.

• A lead session (Claude Code) owns the product: code, releases, the storefront, and every decision that leaves the building.
• A build session gets one scoped brief at a time (e.g. "checkout-first done-for-you service, test it, hand it over, do not deploy") and works on its own git worktree.
• Two outreach sessions research: one finds vendors launching on WarriorPlus/JVZoo and audits their pages, the other finds partners. Neither can send anything. They write drafts; the lead session checks every draft against the live page, fixes attribution, and only then adds the file name to an approval list the sender reads.
• Codex reviews every release: medium by default, high plus an adversarial pass for money, mail and delivery, with a written pass bar so it doesn't loop on trivia.

What the gate caught on day one: claims attributed to the wrong source ("the reviewer asked us" for things the reviewer never asked), audit links that would have shown a vendor a false warning, and one email that would have gone to a competitor. Of the first 20 vendor drafts, 2 were dropped, 6 rewritten and 6 had a misleading link removed.

The September 28 draft reported 38 emails delivered, 2 clicks, 0 replies and 0 sales. These are historical figures, not current totals.

(Link in the first comment, per the rules.)

We make ThreadFox. We shared it here on September 26; this update adds something concrete to the same $49 purchase.

If you have several apps, give your AI a separate launch brief for each: who needs this product, one useful example you can show, and what an interested reader should do next. Keep one shared posting record and calendar for the Reddit account, so the apps' campaigns respect the same account limits.

ThreadFox is a one-time toolkit your own Claude Desktop, Claude Code or Codex can use to research Reddit communities, check their rules, prepare introductions and publish through your signed-in Chrome. The license covers your own projects and business.

The $49 purchase now includes a tailored Launch Pack for one product: relevant communities, quoted posting rules, suggested angles and three drafts. Claim it in your buyer library; we email it within 24 hours.

You can inspect our complete example first: two standalone posts and one launch-thread comment, with the rules and actual publication links.

Your AI subscription is separate. Chrome and a Reddit account are required. The kit has a 30-day refund.

Sample and purchase details are in the first comment.

I'm with StorySitting. We put together a small family-history project: choose five pictures, give each an ID, and ask someone who remembers them about the names and the story outside the frame. Keep uncertain dates and conflicting recollections clearly labeled instead of turning guesses into facts.

There's a free one-page worksheet for the photo's location, the story, and the storyteller's sharing preferences. No email required. The photo-handling section links to the National Archives.

Our paid service records family stories by phone. We also have three complimentary Start accounts available across our outreach for families willing to try it: three calls and chapters, with no card or public testimonial required. If interested, email hello@storysitting.com with 'Family trial'.

I'm working on StorySitting. We put together this free guide with 52 questions for parents and grandparents, grouped by childhood, family, school, relationships, work and raising children. You can use it without buying anything.

A few starting points: What's the first house you remember? Walk me through the front door. What was a normal weeknight like when the kids were small? Is there a family story that's told differently depending on who tells it?

Pick two or three questions, ask permission before recording, and leave room for tangents. StorySitting itself is a paid AI phone interview service that turns conversations into chapters and keeps the recordings; the questions are free to use yourself.

I'm working on StorySitting. We published a free guide to recording a parent's life story: choose a comfortable setting, ask permission to record, start with one concrete question, and save the original audio with the date and who's speaking.

When turning it into writing, keep their phrasing and don't add details they didn't say. A short conversation about their childhood home or first job is enough to start.

You can do this yourself with a phone. Our paid StorySitting service offers AI phone interviews that become chapters with recordings, but the guide doesn't require buying or signing up.

Update: I'm offering three complimentary Start accounts across our outreach. Each includes three phone interviews, three written chapters, and the original recordings. No card, purchase or public review required. Try it with a willing adult relative or friend; you'll need two different US phone numbers, yours and theirs. The storyteller chooses whether to participate on the first call.

Check availability and sign up free: https://storysitting.com/begin/?invite=press-family-trial

Please keep phone numbers and private family details out of comments.

I publish WW3.press.