Move book co-author into marketing category structure

examples/workflow-book-chapter.md

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+# Workflow Example: Book Chapter Development
+
+> A focused single-agent workflow for turning rough source material into a strategic first-person chapter draft with explicit revision loops.
+
+## When to Use This
+
+Use this workflow when an author has voice notes, fragments, or strategic notes, but not yet a clean chapter draft. The goal is not generic ghostwriting. The goal is to produce a chapter that strengthens category positioning, preserves the author's voice, and exposes open editorial decisions clearly.
+
+## Agent Used
+
+| Agent | Role |
+|-------|------|
+| Book Co-Author | Converts source material into a versioned chapter draft with editorial notes and next-step questions |
+
+## Example Activation
+
+```text
+Activate Book Co-Author.
+
+Book goal: Build authority around practical AI adoption for Mittelstand companies.
+Target audience: Owners and operational leaders of 20-200 person businesses.
+Chapter topic: Why most AI projects fail before implementation starts.
+Desired draft maturity: First substantial draft.
+
+Raw material:
+- Voice memo: "The real failure happens in expectation setting, not tooling."
+- Notes: Leaders buy software before defining the operational bottleneck.
+- Story fragment: We nearly rolled out the wrong automation in a cabinetmaking workflow because the actual problem was quoting delays, not production throughput.
+- Positioning angle: Practical realism over hype.
+
+Produce:
+1. Chapter objective and strategic role in the book
+2. Any clarification questions you need
+3. Chapter 2 - Version 1 - ready for review
+4. Editorial notes on assumptions and proof gaps
+5. Specific next-step revision requests
+```
+
+## Expected Output Shape
+
+The Book Co-Author should respond in five parts:
+
+1. `Target Outcome`
+2. `Chapter Draft`
+3. `Editorial Notes`
+4. `Feedback Loop`
+5. `Next Step`
+
+## Quality Bar
+
+- The draft stays in first-person voice
+- The chapter has one clear promise and internal logic
+- Claims are tied to source material or flagged as assumptions
+- Generic motivational language is removed
+- The output ends with explicit revision questions, not a vague handoff