| name | ensemble-content-scorer |
| description | Multi-model consensus scoring for content ideas. Scores the same idea with Claude, GPT-4o, Gemini, and Grok in parallel, then aggregates for a balanced verdict. Reduces single-model bias and improves viral predictions. |
Ensemble Content Scorer
Wisdom of crowds, but for AI. This skill scores your content ideas using multiple AI models, then aggregates for consensus. More reliable than single-model predictions.
WHAT IT DOES
Content Idea
│
┌────────────────┼────────────────┐
│ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼
[Claude] [GPT-4o] [Gemini]
Score Score Score
│ │ │
└────────────────┼────────────────┘
│
▼
[Aggregator (Claude)]
│
▼
Consensus Score + Verdict
WHY MULTI-MODEL?
| Single Model | Ensemble |
|---|
| May have biases | Biases cancel out |
| One perspective | Multiple perspectives |
| Black box score | Transparent reasoning |
| May miss nuances | Catches different angles |
TRIGGERS
Use this skill when you say:
- "Score this content idea"
- "Is this topic worth pursuing?"
- "Rate my video concept"
- "Predict if this will go viral"
- "Ensemble score: [topic]"
USAGE
In Claude Code (Recommended)
"Ensemble score: Statins myth-busting for Indian audience"
"Score this video idea: Why your LDL target depends on your risk"
"Rate these ideas and rank them:
1. GLP-1 agonists explained
2. Heart attack warning signs
3. Is coconut oil heart-healthy?"
CLI Mode
python scripts/score_content.py --idea "Statins myth-busting for Indian audience"
python scripts/score_content.py --ideas "GLP-1 explained" "Statin myths" "CAC scoring"
python scripts/score_content.py --idea "Topic" --models claude,gpt4o,gemini
SCORING DIMENSIONS
Each model scores on these dimensions (1-10):
| Dimension | What It Measures |
|---|
| Relevance | How relevant to target audience (Indian patients/doctors) |
| Novelty | How fresh is the angle? Been covered before? |
| Expertise Match | Does it match your expertise as interventional cardiologist? |
| Engagement Potential | Will it capture and hold attention? |
| Share-ability | Will people share this? Controversy potential? |
| Evergreen Factor | Will this be relevant in 6 months? |
Total Score: 0-60
OUTPUT FORMAT
# ENSEMBLE CONTENT SCORE
**Idea:** Statins myth-busting for Indian audience - why most "side effects" aren't real
**Date:** 2025-01-01
---
## INDIVIDUAL MODEL SCORES
### Claude (Anthropic)
| Dimension | Score | Reasoning |
|-----------|-------|-----------|
| Relevance | 9/10 | High - statins widely prescribed in India, misinformation common |
| Novelty | 7/10 | Topic covered before, but Indian-specific angle is fresher |
| Expertise | 9/10 | Perfect for interventional cardiologist |
| Engagement | 8/10 | Controversial enough to spark discussion |
| Shareability | 8/10 | Will trigger debates |
| Evergreen | 9/10 | Statin myths persist |
| **Total** | **50/60** | |
### GPT-4o (OpenAI)
| Dimension | Score | Reasoning |
|-----------|-------|-----------|
| Relevance | 9/10 | Very relevant for Indian audience |
| Novelty | 6/10 | Many statin videos exist |
| Expertise | 10/10 | Perfect fit |
| Engagement | 9/10 | Myth-busting format works |
| Shareability | 8/10 | Good controversy factor |
| Evergreen | 8/10 | Will stay relevant |
| **Total** | **50/60** | |
### Gemini (Google)
| Dimension | Score | Reasoning |
|-----------|-------|-----------|
| Relevance | 8/10 | Good for health-conscious Indians |
| Novelty | 7/10 | Indian angle adds freshness |
| Expertise | 9/10 | Great fit |
| Engagement | 7/10 | Educational more than viral |
| Shareability | 7/10 | Moderate share potential |
| Evergreen | 9/10 | Long-lasting relevance |
| **Total** | **47/60** | |
---
## CONSENSUS SCORE
| Model | Total Score |
|-------|-------------|
| Claude | 50/60 |
| GPT-4o | 50/60 |
| Gemini | 47/60 |
| **Average** | **49/60 (81.7%)** |
| **Std Dev** | 1.7 (High Consensus) |
---
## VERDICT
🟢 **STRONG PURSUE** (Score: 49/60, Consensus: High)
All models agree this is a strong content idea. The combination of:
- High relevance to your audience
- Perfect expertise match
- Good controversy factor
- Evergreen potential
Makes this a priority topic for your content calendar.
---
## RECOMMENDATIONS
1. **Angle Enhancement**: Focus on the "nocebo effect" - most statin "side effects" are psychosomatic
2. **Hook Suggestion**: "90% of statin side effects aren't real - here's the data"
3. **Format**: 12-15 minute deep dive with studies
4. **Hinglish Tip**: Use "side effect ka drama" for relatability
---
## DISSENT ANALYSIS
- **Gemini** scored lower on engagement (7 vs 8-9)
- Suggests: May need stronger hook to maximize viral potential
- Consider: Adding patient testimonial or counter-narrative
SCORING TIERS
| Score Range | Verdict | Action |
|---|
| 50-60 | 🟢 STRONG PURSUE | High priority, create immediately |
| 40-49 | 🟡 WORTH PURSUING | Good idea, add to calendar |
| 30-39 | 🟠 NEEDS REFINEMENT | Has potential, needs angle work |
| 20-29 | 🔴 RECONSIDER | Weak idea, low priority |
| 0-19 | ⛔ SKIP | Not worth the effort |
CONSENSUS INTERPRETATION
| Std Deviation | Interpretation |
|---|
| < 3 | High consensus - models agree |
| 3-5 | Moderate consensus - some disagreement |
| > 5 | Low consensus - divisive idea (may be worth exploring!) |
INTEGRATION
Enhances:
viral-content-predictor - More reliable predictionsyoutube-script-master - Validate topics before scriptingcontent-repurposer - Know which content to repurpose
Workflow:
Idea Generation → Ensemble Score → [High Score?] → Create Content
↓
[Low Score?] → Refine or Skip
MODELS USED
| Model | Provider | Cost | Notes |
|---|
| Claude Sonnet | Anthropic | Subscription | Your primary |
| GPT-4o | OpenAI | API | Strong analysis |
| Gemini Pro | Google | FREE | Good for fact-checking |
| Grok | xAI | API | Twitter trend awareness |
Minimum required: 2 models (Claude + one other)
Recommended: 3+ models for robust consensus
DEPENDENCIES
anthropic>=0.18.0
openai>=1.0.0
google-generativeai>=0.3.0
python-dotenv>=1.0.0
rich>=13.0.0
API KEYS NEEDED
| Key | Purpose | Status |
|---|
| ANTHROPIC_API_KEY | Claude | Already have |
| OPENAI_API_KEY | GPT-4o | Already have |
| GOOGLE_API_KEY | Gemini | Already have |
| XAI_API_KEY | Grok (optional) | Already have |
BATCH SCORING
For scoring multiple ideas at once:
python scripts/score_content.py --batch \
--ideas "GLP-1 for heart failure" \
"Statin myth-busting" \
"CAC scoring guide" \
"Why LDL matters" \
"Exercise for heart health"
Output:
| Rank | Idea | Score | Verdict |
|------|------|-------|---------|
| 1 | Statin myth-busting | 49/60 | 🟢 STRONG PURSUE |
| 2 | GLP-1 for heart failure | 45/60 | 🟡 WORTH PURSUING |
| 3 | CAC scoring guide | 42/60 | 🟡 WORTH PURSUING |
| 4 | Why LDL matters | 38/60 | 🟠 NEEDS REFINEMENT |
| 5 | Exercise for heart health | 35/60 | 🟠 NEEDS REFINEMENT |
NOTES
- Speed: ~30 seconds for single idea (parallel API calls)
- Cost: Minimal - short prompts to each model
- Reliability: Consensus typically more accurate than single model
- When to ignore: If YOU have strong conviction, trust your expertise
This skill helps you invest your time in content that's more likely to succeed.
