Private AI content workflow

Content Writing Agent

Krystian designed and shipped an internal AI writing workflow with channel briefs, approved sources, writing guidance, saved examples, and human review.

Internal Systems Shipped internally 2024 - Present
BriefAudience + channel + goal
GuidanceApproved sources + writing standards
ReviewWriter revises before use
Internal writing workflow I built. Approved source guidance informs generation, and writers review the result before use.

Exact role

Senior Web Developer (AI workflow design and technical lead)

University of Arizona

Current status

Shipped internally

2024 - Present

Problem

What needed to change

Content writers needed help producing branded, audience-specific copy because generic AI output sounded too obviously AI-generated and did not reliably follow university or department guidance.

Users

Who the system serves

Content writers, content team leadership, and division teams that need enrollment- and brand-aligned copy.

Team context

Where I fit

Built with input from content writers and content leadership, from problem framing through interface and internal production workflow.

Important technical decision

Krystian put channel, audience, approved sources, writing guidance, saved examples, and writer review around the generation step.

Tradeoff or limitation

Writers remain responsible for reviewing generated copy; the workflow does not publish it automatically.

Implementation

What I personally owned

  • Owned project inception, product design, AI workflow design, implementation, coordination, prototype, and production version.
  • Worked with content writers and content leadership from the initial quality complaint through the internal workflow.
  • Designed the interface around channel, audience, voice, style, writing goals, source guidance, and writer review.

Constraints

Hard parts that shaped the work

  • The interface had to capture channel, voice, style, audience, and writing goals without reducing the task to one generic prompt.
  • Research had to remain within approved university sources and university and department writing guidance.
  • Generated copy still required a writer's review before use.

Shipped result

What exists now

  • Prototype and internal production workflow.
  • Channel-specific briefs for voice, style, and audience.
  • Saved examples of good outputs for future improvement.
  • Research mode using approved university-specific sources.
  • Guideline cross-reference against university and department writing standards.

Result

Verified result and current state

  • The internal workflow shipped with channel briefs, approved-source research, saved examples, and writing-guideline checks.
  • Writers remain responsible for reviewing generated content before use.

Technical scope

Tools used

LLM workflowsPrompt/workflow designStructured outputsHuman reviewBrand guidanceEnrollment content workflowsWriting guidelines