@tomako/tools-runtime 0.1.0

package/src/i18n/messages/en/tools/reddit-pain-point-finder.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
+const redditPainPointFinder = {
+  meta: {
+    title: "Reddit / X / Hacker News Pain Point Finder",
+    displayTitle: "Reddit / X / Hacker News Pain Point Finder",
+    description: "Enter a product direction and let a cloud agent research public Reddit, X, and Hacker News discussions, then return communities, recurring complaints, user quotes, frequency, paid intent, feature wedges, and landing page angles.",
+    intro: "Turn one rough direction into a reviewable user-pain report. Built for indie builders, SaaS founders, and plugin makers who need to know where users complain, what hurts often, what may convert to payment, and which narrow feature to ship first.",
+    category: "User research tools",
+    keywords: [
+      "Reddit pain point finder",
+      "customer pain point finder",
+      "Reddit user research tool",
+      "Hacker News pain points",
+      "startup idea validation Reddit",
+    ],
+  },
+  examples: [
+    {
+      label: "SaaS pain validation",
+      input: "AI customer support tool for Shopify sellers",
+      expectedOutput: "Relevant communities, order-status/support complaints, user quotes, frequency, paid intent, feature wedges, and landing page angles.",
+    },
+  ],
+  widget: {
+    directionLabel: "Product direction",
+    directionPlaceholder: "Example: AI customer support tool for Shopify sellers",
+    sourceMixLabel: "Source priority",
+    sourceMix: {
+      all: "Reddit + X + HN",
+      reddit: "Reddit only",
+      x: "Prioritize X",
+      hackerNews: "Prioritize Hacker News",
+      redditHn: "Reddit + Hacker News",
+    },
+    audienceLabel: "Target user (optional)",
+    audiencePlaceholder: "Shopify sellers, indie hackers, support teams",
+    inputHint:
+      "One direction is enough. The agent turns it into search queries, checks public community signals, and records weak evidence instead of hiding it.",
+    submit: "Find user pain points",
+    submitting: "Submitting…",
+    running: "Researching…",
+    emptyTitle: "The pain point report will appear here",
+    emptyHint:
+      "After submission, Tomako returns relevant communities, recurring complaints, user quotes, frequency, paid intent, feature wedges, and landing page angles.",
+    runningTitle: "Researching public community signals",
+    runningHint:
+      "The agent is searching Reddit, X, Hacker News, and public search results. This usually takes 2-5 minutes.",
+    progressTitle: "Recent progress",
+    progressSteps: [
+      "Direction received. Building community search queries.",
+      "Looking for relevant subreddits, X discussions, HN threads, and public complaints.",
+      "Clustering repeated complaints and filtering praise/noise.",
+      "Judging frequency, pain intensity, and willingness to pay.",
+      "Preparing small feature wedges and landing page angles.",
+    ],
+    progressResultReady: "Structured pain point report has been written back. Reading and validating it.",
+    status: {
+      default: "Researching",
+      PENDING: "Queued",
+      STREAMING: "Researching",
+      AWAITING_INPUT: "Analyzing",
+      AWAITING_RESULT: "Compiling result",
+      SUCCEEDED: "Finishing",
+    },
+    retry: "Retry",
+    errors: {
+      invalid: "Describe a real product direction in at least 12 characters and avoid test/demo placeholders.",
+      submit: "Submit failed. Check your network and try again.",
+      task: "The community pain research task failed. Please retry later.",
+      timeout: "The research timed out. Public discussion may be scattered.",
+      schema: "The returned result format was invalid. Please retry.",
+    },
+    analyzeAnother: "Analyze another direction",
+    copy: "Copy report",
+    copied: "Copied",
+    boundaryFallback:
+      "This is an assistant report based on public information, not real-time complete coverage or commercial advice. Review sources, interview users, and test actual willingness to pay.",
+    signals: { weak: "Weak", mixed: "Mixed", strong: "Strong" },
+    payment: { low: "Low", medium: "Medium", high: "High", unknown: "Unknown" },
+    confidence: { low: "Low", medium: "Medium", high: "High" },
+    report: {
+      kicker: "Pain point report",
+      confidence: "Confidence",
+      taskId: "Task ID",
+      queries: "Search queries",
+      frequency: "Frequency",
+      paidIntent: "Paid intent",
+      whyItHurts: "Why it hurts",
+      smallFeature: "Small feature",
+      landingAngle: "Landing page angle",
+      avoidBuilding: "Avoid building first",
+      nextSteps: "Next research steps",
+    },
+    sections: {
+      communities: "Relevant communities",
+      complaints: "Recurring complaints and user words",
+      wedges: "Feature wedges worth testing",
+      next: "Avoid detours",
+    },
+  },
+  guide: {
+    visualAlt: {
+      hero: "Public community discussions flowing into a user pain point report",
+      workspace: "One product direction becoming a community pain point report",
+      clusters: "Repeated complaints clustered into pain themes",
+      payment: "Opportunity scoring with frequency and paid intent",
+      angle: "A complaint becoming a small feature and landing page angle",
+    },
+    valueKicker: "What you get",
+    valueTitle: "Not “users need a better tool”: who complains, where, and why it matters",
+    valueItems: [
+      "Relevant communities: subreddits, X topics, HN threads, and search queries worth tracking next.",
+      "Recurring complaints: scattered posts clustered into pain themes, with short user-language snippets instead of second-hand summaries only.",
+      "Paid-intent judgment: time cost, current workarounds, budget clues, and repeated frequency are separated from vague interest.",
+      "Feature and landing page wedges: complaints become narrow first features and concrete positioning angles for indie builders.",
+    ],
+    standardKicker: "Good-tool standard",
+    standardTitle: "A useful pain point finder should help you avoid building the wrong thing",
+    standardItems: [
+      "User language first: keep the complaint scene, phrasing, and community context visible.",
+      "Frequency versus noise: one viral post is not a market. The report must show signal strength and evidence gaps.",
+      "Payment motive: useful output explains what users lose, what they do now, and why they might pay.",
+      "Testable wedge: every opportunity should become a small feature, landing page headline, or interview question.",
+    ],
+    resultKicker: "Result guidance",
+    resultTitle: "Use the report to validate the narrowest wedge before building the full product",
+    resultGuidanceItems: [
+      "Pick one complaint with strong frequency, medium-to-high paid intent, and a small enough first feature.",
+      "Turn user snippets into interview questions and confirm the pain with 5-10 target users.",
+      "If sources are thin or confidence is low, continue manual query research before building.",
+      "When multiple communities repeat the same complaint, test with a small tool, Chrome extension, AI widget, or service offer first.",
+    ],
+    faqKicker: "FAQ",
+    faqTitle: "Boundaries before you use it",
+    faqItems: [
+      {
+        question: "Does it access private communities or logged-in content?",
+        answer:
+          "No. The workflow should only analyze public, accessible discussions and search results. It does not access private, logged-in, deleted, or paywalled content.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Are user quotes exact direct quotes?",
+        answer:
+          "Not always. To avoid misquoting and copyright issues, the report may use short snippets or conservative paraphrases with source clues for review.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Is frequency an exact statistic?",
+        answer:
+          "No. Frequency is a weak/mixed/strong judgment from currently visible public signals, meant for research prioritization.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Why is this useful for SaaS, AI tools, plugins, and Chrome extensions?",
+        answer:
+          "These products often start from one repeated complaint: order status, export, notifications, sync, review, or workflow cleanup before expanding into a larger product.",
+      },
+    ],
+    ctaHint:
+      "When one pain point looks worth pursuing, turn the idea into a full validation report or interview guide.",
+    ctaPrimary: "Generate idea validation report",
+    ctaSecondary: "Generate interview guide",
+  },
+} as const;
+
+export default redditPainPointFinder;

package/src/i18n/messages/en/tools/shared.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+const shared = {
+  backToTools: "Back to tools",
+  breadcrumbTools: "Free GTM tools",
+  updated: "Updated",
+  mcpGuide: "MCP usage guide",
+  toolWorkspace: "Tool workspace",
+  toolWorkspaceHint: "Enter inputs, review the output, then use the page guidance for the next step.",
+  searchIntent: "Tool task",
+  readingTime: "Reading time",
+  keywords: "Start here",
+  inputSignal: "Input",
+  outputSignal: "Output",
+  boundarySignal: "Boundary",
+  faqHeading: "FAQ",
+  types: {
+    calculator: "Calculator",
+    downloader: "Downloader",
+    generator: "Generator",
+    analyzer: "Analyzer",
+    tester: "Tester",
+  },
+} as const;
+
+export default shared;

package/src/i18n/messages/en/tools/social-listening-research-report.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,185 @@
+const socialListeningResearchReport = {
+  meta: {
+    title: "Reddit / X Social Listening Research Report",
+    displayTitle: "Reddit / X Social Listening Research Report",
+    description: "Enter a research question and let a cloud agent inspect public Reddit and X discussions, then summarize themes, sentiment, user-language evidence, opportunities, risks, gaps, and validation steps.",
+    intro: "Turn a rough research question into a reviewable social listening report. Built for founders, PMs, growth teams, and researchers who need to understand what public communities are saying, resisting, and asking for.",
+    category: "User research tools",
+    keywords: [
+      "Reddit research tool",
+      "X analysis tool",
+      "social listening report",
+      "Reddit market research",
+      "AI social media research",
+    ],
+  },
+  examples: [
+    {
+      label: "Product opportunity research",
+      input: "Why do developers complain about current AI code review tools: price, accuracy, or workflow integration?",
+      expectedOutput: "Theme clusters, representative user language, sentiment, opportunities, risks, source clues, evidence gaps, and validation steps.",
+    },
+  ],
+  widget: {
+    questionLabel: "Research question",
+    questionPlaceholder:
+      "Example: Why do developers complain about current AI code review tools: price, accuracy, or workflow integration?",
+    platformsLabel: "Source scope",
+    platforms: {
+      redditX: "Reddit + X",
+      reddit: "Reddit only",
+      x: "X only",
+      all: "Reddit + X + public web",
+    },
+    audienceLabel: "Audience (optional)",
+    audiencePlaceholder: "Developers, indie founders, product marketers",
+    marketLabel: "Market (optional)",
+    marketPlaceholder: "US, global, B2B SaaS",
+    inputHint:
+      "One question is enough. Tomako converts it into public search queries, keeps source gaps visible, and treats the result as research evidence rather than guaranteed truth.",
+    submit: "Generate research report",
+    submitting: "Submitting...",
+    running: "Researching...",
+    emptyTitle: "Your social listening report will appear here",
+    emptyHint:
+      "After submission, Tomako returns themes, sentiment, representative user language, opportunities, risks, source clues, evidence gaps, and next validation questions.",
+    runningTitle: "Researching public discussion signals",
+    runningHint:
+      "The agent is checking public Reddit, X, and search-visible pages. Partial sections may appear before the final report.",
+    progressTitle: "Recent progress",
+    progressSteps: [
+      "Question received. Building public-community search queries.",
+      "Looking for Reddit threads, X posts, and search-visible discussions.",
+      "Separating repeated themes from isolated comments and noise.",
+      "Estimating sentiment, evidence strength, opportunities, and risk.",
+      "Preparing a multi-dimensional report with source gaps and validation steps.",
+    ],
+    progressResultReady:
+      "A structured report snapshot has been written back. Reading and validating it.",
+    status: {
+      default: "Researching",
+      PENDING: "Queued",
+      STREAMING: "Researching",
+      AWAITING_INPUT: "Analyzing",
+      AWAITING_RESULT: "Reading result",
+      SUCCEEDED: "Finishing",
+    },
+    retry: "Retry",
+    errors: {
+      invalid:
+        "Describe a real research question in at least 15 characters and avoid test/demo placeholders.",
+      submit: "Submit failed. Check your network and try again.",
+      task: "The social listening research task failed. Please retry later.",
+      timeout:
+        "The research timed out. Existing partial sections are kept; retry if you need the complete report.",
+      schema: "The returned result format was invalid. Please retry.",
+    },
+    analyzeAnother: "Analyze another question",
+    copy: "Copy report",
+    copied: "Copied",
+    boundaryFallback:
+      "This is an assistant report based on public information, not complete real-time coverage or professional market research. Review sources and validate conclusions with users.",
+    strength: { weak: "Weak", mixed: "Mixed", strong: "Strong" },
+    sentiment: {
+      negative: "Negative",
+      mixed: "Mixed",
+      positive: "Positive",
+      polarized: "Polarized",
+    },
+    confidence: { low: "Low", medium: "Medium", high: "High" },
+    report: {
+      kicker: "Social listening report",
+      partialKicker: "Partial report",
+      partialSummary: "The first report section is still being prepared.",
+      confidence: "Confidence",
+      sections: "Sections",
+      sources: "Sources",
+      taskId: "Task ID",
+      inProgress: "In progress",
+      sentiment: "Sentiment",
+      evidenceStrength: "Evidence",
+      implication: "Implication",
+      risks: "Risks and mitigations",
+      questions: "Questions to validate",
+      missingEvidence: "Evidence gaps",
+    },
+    sections: {
+      scope: "Search scope",
+      themes: "Themes and user language",
+      opportunities: "Opportunities worth testing",
+      next: "Risk and validation plan",
+      sources: "Sources and gaps",
+    },
+  },
+  guide: {
+    visualAlt: {
+      hero: "Public Reddit and X discussions becoming a structured research report",
+      workspace: "A rough question becoming a social listening report",
+      themes: "Community comments clustered into themes and sentiment signals",
+      opportunities: "Research signals becoming opportunities and validation steps",
+      boundary: "Public sources and evidence gaps shown clearly",
+    },
+    valueKicker: "What you get",
+    valueTitle: "A report that keeps themes, sources, and uncertainty visible",
+    valueItems: [
+      "Theme clusters: repeated Reddit and X discussion patterns grouped into readable themes instead of a flat list of links.",
+      "User-language evidence: short source-labeled snippets or conservative paraphrases, so you can review the original context.",
+      "Opportunity and risk map: what users seem to want, what could go wrong, and which assumptions need validation next.",
+      "Evidence gaps: thin sources, platform access limits, weak signals, and missing segments stay visible instead of being hidden.",
+    ],
+    standardKicker: "Good-report standard",
+    standardTitle: "A useful social listening report should not pretend weak evidence is certainty",
+    standardItems: [
+      "Source transparency: the report should show where signals came from and which search queries were used.",
+      "Theme quality: repeated patterns should be separated from one-off comments, jokes, promotion, and praise-only noise.",
+      "Actionability: each conclusion should lead to a positioning angle, product question, research task, or validation step.",
+      "Boundaries: public-platform limits, private content, deleted posts, and incomplete coverage must be written plainly.",
+    ],
+    resultKicker: "Result guidance",
+    resultTitle: "Use the report to decide what to investigate next, not to skip validation",
+    resultGuidanceItems: [
+      "Start with themes that have repeated sources, clear user language, and a plausible business or product implication.",
+      "Turn representative comments into interview questions, survey prompts, landing page hypotheses, or competitor checks.",
+      "If the report flags weak evidence, run narrower searches or ask users directly before changing product direction.",
+      "Share the summary, risks, and source list with your team so everyone can review the same evidence base.",
+    ],
+    boundaryKicker: "Support and limits",
+    boundaryTitle: "Public signals only, with source gaps treated as part of the result",
+    boundaryItems: [
+      "Supported: rough research questions, product directions, competitor concerns, audience objections, and platform discussion scans.",
+      "Not supported: private communities, logged-in timelines, deleted posts, paywalled data, exact market sizing, or guaranteed real-time coverage.",
+      "Failure recovery: if a result is thin, narrow the audience, name a product category, choose one platform, or add target geography.",
+      "Result use: copy the report into your research doc, review source URLs, and validate strong claims with interviews or landing page tests.",
+    ],
+    faqKicker: "FAQ",
+    faqTitle: "Boundaries before you trust the report",
+    faqItems: [
+      {
+        question: "Does it crawl private Reddit communities or logged-in X timelines?",
+        answer:
+          "No. It should only analyze public, accessible discussions and search-visible pages. Private, authenticated, deleted, restricted, or paywalled content is out of scope.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Are the quotes exact direct quotes?",
+        answer:
+          "Not always. The report may use very short direct snippets or conservative paraphrases with source labels to reduce misquoting and copyright risk.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "Can I use the report as a final market research answer?",
+        answer:
+          "No. Treat it as a fast research brief. Strong themes still need source review, user interviews, survey checks, or product experiments.",
+      },
+      {
+        question: "What should I enter if my first report is too thin?",
+        answer:
+          "Add the target audience, market, competitor name, product category, or a narrower wording of the problem. Broad questions often produce broad evidence gaps.",
+      },
+    ],
+    ctaHint:
+      "When one community signal turns into a product idea, continue with a pain point finder or full community pain extractor.",
+    ctaPrimary: "Find product pain points",
+    ctaSecondary: "Extract community pain report",
+  },
+} as const;
+
+export default socialListeningResearchReport;

package/src/i18n/messages/en/tools/social-media-profile-generator.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+import socialProfileKit from "./social-profile-kit";
+
+const socialMediaProfileGenerator = {
+  meta: {
+    title: "Social Media Profile Draft Generator",
+    description: "Turn a person or brand positioning brief into editable draft profile assets for X, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, and more.",
+    intro: "Turn one brief into editable profile drafts.",
+    category: "Social Media Tools",
+    keywords: [
+      "social media profile",
+      "profile draft generator",
+      "bio generator",
+      "brand profile kit preview",
+    ],
+    inputSignal: "Name, positioning, audience, tone, and target platforms",
+    outputSignal: "Draft avatars, banners, bios, usernames, and downloadable profile kits",
+    boundarySignal: "Use results as editable drafts; they do not replace likeness rights, trademark checks, or platform review rules",
+  },
+  guide: socialProfileKit.guide,
+} as const;
+
+export default socialMediaProfileGenerator;