# X impact checker Human Guide

## What This Is For
Analyze and optimize X (Twitter) posts for viral potential and reach using heuristics inspired by X's published open-source recommendation architecture. It gives the agent a clearer input/output frame for x impact checker: what context to ask for, what decisions to make, and what usable artifact to return.

Use this as a human-readable version of the X impact checker agent skill. It is meant for marketers, operators, founders, and other non-coders who want the workflow without reading agent-specific implementation instructions.

## When To Use This
- Use this when you need a repeatable process for x impact checker.
- Use this when the task needs judgment, examples, constraints, or a clear output format rather than a one-off prompt.
- Use this when you want to hand an AI assistant enough context to produce a usable marketing artifact.

## When Not To Use This
- Do not use this when you only need a quick factual answer.
- Do not use this when the work depends on private data you cannot share with the assistant.
- Do not use this as a replacement for legal, compliance, financial, or medical review.

## What You Need Before Starting
- The goal or business outcome you want.
- The audience, customer segment, or market context.
- Any source material the assistant should respect, such as notes, briefs, examples, URLs, or brand guidance.
- Constraints such as tone, length, channel, deadline, region, or approval requirements.
- A clear definition of what a good final answer should look like.

## Step-By-Step Workflow
1. State the job clearly: "Use the X impact checker guide to help me with..."
2. Add context: audience, goal, offer, channel, source material, and constraints.
3. Ask the assistant to identify missing inputs before producing the final output.
4. Have the assistant follow the skill-specific guidance below.
5. Review the result against the final checklist and ask for revisions where needed.

## Skill-Specific Guidance
- Score a tweet draft before publishing
- Understand why a tweet underperformed
- Rewrite tweets to align with Twitter's ranking mechanisms
- Build topical authority in a specific niche
- Debug inconsistent engagement rates
- **Analyzing post content** (in_progress → completed)
- **Calculating scores across all elements** (in_progress → completed)
- **Generating top 5 priority improvements** (in_progress → completed)
- **Creating optimized version** (in_progress → completed)
- **Score**: `🎯 XX/100 (Grade: X)`
- **📈 Top 5 Priority Improvements**: Specific, actionable suggestions across different categories
- **✨ Optimized Version**: Rewritten post with improvements applied (in original language)

## Decision Points And Nuance
The original skill emphasizes: Workspace Context, Operating Contract, When to Use, Scoring System (100 points), Tier 1: Core Engagement (60 points), Tier 2: Extended Engagement (25 points), Tier 3: Relationship Building (15 points), Penalties (subtract from total), Grades, Output Format.

Use these questions to steer the work:
- What is the intended audience or buyer?
- What source material must be preserved?
- What should the assistant optimize for: clarity, persuasion, accuracy, speed, creativity, or conversion?
- What examples represent the desired quality bar?
- What should the assistant avoid?

## Common Mistakes
- | Tweepcred | Reply to quality accounts; avoid engagement bait; engage deeply |
- ❌ "Debugging is hard." → ✅ "Spent 3 hours debugging a production issue. The fix? A missing semicolon I added during 'quick cleanup' at 2am. Never touching working code past midnight again 😅"
- Short clips don't receive full video engagement credit
- Video view scoring is conditional on duration. Low-effort clips don't get full credit.
- Block (-1.2) and report (-1.5) have strong negative impact. Content must avoid triggering these.

## Copy-And-Paste Prompt
```text
Use the X impact checker human guide.

My goal:
[Describe the business outcome]

Audience:
[Describe who this is for]

Context and source material:
[Paste notes, examples, links, or existing copy]

Constraints:
[Tone, length, channel, timeline, must-include items, must-avoid items]

Before producing the final output, ask me for any missing information that would materially improve the result.
```

## Final Checklist
- [ ] The output matches the original goal.
- [ ] The audience and context are reflected in the answer.
- [ ] Important constraints and source material were preserved.
- [ ] The assistant made the relevant decisions explicit.
- [ ] The final artifact is ready to use, review, or hand to the next person.

## Source
This guide was generated from the manojbajaj95/claude-gtm-plugin skill entry for `x-impact-checker`.

## Source Skill Notes
These notes preserve the nuance from the original skill. Use them as supporting reference when the workflow above feels too generic.

# X Impact Checker

## Workspace Context

Read bootstrap context before asking questions: `strategy/brand.md` for brand, audience, offer, channels, tools, constraints, and metrics; `about/me.md` for personal voice; `content/ideas.md` and `content/calendar.md` for content planning. Use legacy product-marketing context files only as fallback. Save generated drafts to `content/<platform>/drafts/YYYY-MM-DD_short-topic-slug.md`, and route durable learnings back to `strategy/brand.md`, `about/me.md`, or `content/ideas.md`.

## Operating Contract

This skill is self-contained for its frontmatter scope: use its local instructions, references, scripts, and assets as the playbook; ask only for missing task-specific inputs; hand off to adjacent skills instead of expanding scope; and return an actionable artifact, decision, plan, draft, or diagnostic.


Analyze X posts for viral potential using a 19-element scoring system and heuristics inspired by X's published recommendation architecture.

## When to Use

- Score a tweet draft before publishing
- Understand why a tweet underperformed
- Rewrite tweets to align with Twitter's ranking mechanisms
- Build topical authority in a specific niche
- Debug inconsistent engagement rates

---

## Scoring System (100 points)

### Tier 1: Core Engagement (60 points)

| Factor | Max | Scoring Guide |
|--------|-----|---------------|
| Reply Potential | 22 | 22: Direct question/debatable claim, 12: Invites response, 4: Statement only |
| Retweet Potential | 16 | 16: Actionable insight/surprising fact, 8: Interesting but niche, 0: No share value |
| Favorite Potential | 12 | 12: Emotionally resonant/personal story, 6: Useful reference, 0: Low appeal |
| Quote Potential | 10 | 10: Strong opinion inviting commentary, 5: Thought-provoking, 0: No quote value |

### Tier 2: Extended Engagement (25 points)

| Factor | Max | Scoring Guide |
|--------|-----|---------------|
| Dwell Time | 6 | 6: Long-form/detailed content, 3: Medium depth, 0: Skimmable |
| Continuous Dwell Time | 4 | 4: Thread/story arc requiring sustained attention, 2: Medium complexity, 0: Quick read |
| Click Potential | 5 | 5: Compelling link with clear CTA, 3: Link with context, 1: Bare URL, 0: No link |
| Photo Expand Potential | 4 | 4: Multiple images/visual storytelling, 2: Single image reference, 0: No visual content |
| Video View Potential | 3 | 3: Long-form video with hook (>5s), 2: Short clip, 0: No video |
| Quoted Click Potential | 3 | 3: Bold claim inviting verification, 2: Interesting claim, 0: Self-contained |

### Tier 3: Relationship Building (15 points)

| Factor | Max | Scoring Guide |
|--------|-----|---------------|
| Profile Click | 5 | 5: Creates author curiosity, 3: Shows expertise, 0: Generic voice |
| Follow Potential | 4 | 4: Demonstrates ongoing value, 2: Shows potential, 0: One-off content |
| Share Potential | 2 | 2: General sharing value, 1: Limited appeal, 0: No value |
| Share via DM | 2 | 2: Personal/relatable "send to friend" content, 1: Somewhat relatable, 0: Generic |
| Share via Copy Link | 2 | 2: Reference/bookmark worthy, 1: Useful but not evergreen, 0: Ephemeral |

### Penalties (subtract from total)

| Risk | Range | Trigger |
|------|-------|---------|
| Not Interested | -5 to -15 | Clickbait, irrelevant content |
| Mute Risk | -5 to -15 | Repetitive, annoying patterns |
| Block Risk | -10 to -25 | Offensive, aggressive tone |
| Report Risk | -15 to -30 | Policy violations, spam signals |

### Grades

| Score | Grade |
|-------|-------|
| 90-100 | S (Exceptional) |
| 75-89 | A (Strong) |
| 60-74 | B (Good) |
| 45-59 | C (Average) |
| 30-44 | D (Below average) |
| 0-29 | F (Low potential) |

---

## Output Format

### Progress Tracking