video-publish-qa

name

video-publish-qa

description

Post-publish packaging QA for an uploaded YouTube video. Reads the live metadata via the youtube-studio MCP, checks title / tags / description / captions against the channel's packaging rules (docs/creator-patterns.md §5–§6), and FIXES what the MCP allows — title, description, tags, thumbnail, and captions — under a strict preview-then-confirm gate. Use after a video is uploaded, or when the user says "QA my upload", "check this video's packaging/metadata", "audit my latest upload", "did I publish that right", "run the publish checklist", "check the tags/title/description/captions on <video>". Takes an explicit video ID or defaults to the channel's latest upload.

video-publish-qa

Publish-time packaging QA for a single uploaded YouTube video. The point is to catch the silent regressions the flagship hit — captions OFF, three thin tags, a flat title that doesn't restate the hook — before they cost a week of bad indexing. Read the live metadata, grade title / tags / description / captions against the corpus packaging rules, fix what the MCP can write, and hand off what it can't.

This skill builds on top of the youtube-studio skill. Follow that skill's conventions verbatim — auth + quota first, cheap reads, and the preview→confirm write-gate. This file is only the packaging-specific checklist that rides on it.

MCP write surface

video_update_metadata (50u) can WRITE title, description, tags, category, and privacy. video_set_thumbnail (50u) can write the thumbnail. caption_insert (400u) adds a new caption track; caption_update (450u) replaces an existing track and needs that track's id from a prior caption_list(video_id) (1u) — both are cost-gated, confirm before calling. video_upload / video_schedule exist too but are upload-time, not part of post-publish QA.

Step 1 — Auth, quota, and resolve the video

1. Per the youtube-studio skill: call auth_status (stop and tell the user to run uv run youtube-studio-mcp auth if unauthorized), then quota_status. Each metadata write is 50u — budget before proposing fixes.
2. Resolve the target:
   • An explicit video ID the user gave, or
   • "my latest upload" → list_uploads(page_size=1) and take the top item. Confirm the title back to the user so you're QA-ing the right video.
3. If a local videos/<slug>-<date>/ folder for this video is on disk, note script.md, seo/research.json, and description.md — they sharpen the checks below. They're optional; degrade gracefully when absent (skip the check and say it was skipped, don't guess).

Step 2 — Read once, grade each field

Read with videos_get(video_ids=[id], parts=["snippet","contentDetails","status"]) (1u). Then evaluate each check below and collect proposed fixes — write nothing yet. Each rule traces to docs/creator-patterns.md §6 WS3 (and §5 for titles).

A. Title — snippet.title

• Present, ≤100 chars.
• Matches a §5 template; for this channel's lane prefer the quiet-dominance / untold-origin family ("How [Tech] Quietly Took Over…", "The [Tech] That Runs the World", "Why [Tech] Refuses to Die").
• Carries a specific number / date / duration where the topic allows.
• ALL-CAPS limited to 1–2 charged words, never the whole line.
• Most curiosity-loaded element (the famous subject, the shock number, the question word) front-loaded so it survives truncation.
• FAIL → propose 2–3 rewrites; let the user pick.

B. Title ↔ first spoken line

• Only if local script.md is available: the title's core promise must be restated in sentence one (the cold open). Diff them; FAIL if the open doesn't confirm the title (§6 WS3.1). No script.md → skip, and say it was skipped.

C. Tags — snippet.tags

• ≥ ~6 relevant tags. The first tag = the exact target keyword (cross-ref the top noun in seo/research.json if present).
• Flag the three-generic-tags smell (the flagship's "JavaScript, Programming, WebDevelopment" failure) — a thin or off-topic set.
• FAIL → propose an ordered ~8–12 tag list: first = the keyword, then the searchable nouns the video is actually about.

D. Description — snippet.description

• Leads with a one-paragraph restatement of the hook (the withheld-dependency framing), not a dry summary (§6 WS3.3).
• Has chapters/timestamps marking the major reset boundaries, sources, the fixed sign-off identity, and a comment-bait sequel offer ("want a part two on X?").
• FAIL/missing → offer to run the description-writer skill (it reads script.md / transcript.json / seo/research.json and writes description.md), then propose pasting the result.

E. Captions — contentDetails.caption ("true" / "false")

• Must be "true". If "false" → FLAG (this was the flagship's regression).
  • Offer to run create-srt-and-translate (English only) to produce captions.srt if it doesn't already exist.
  • Then call caption_insert(video_id, file_path="captions.srt", language="en", name="English") (400u — show cost_preview and wait for explicit approval before calling).
  • If the user prefers the manual path: Studio → Subtitles → Add language → English → Upload file → With timing.
  • Note the payoff: English captions also unlock YouTube auto-translate and the Hindi auto-dub the channel's India-heavy audience benefits from.
• If caption is already "true" but the track is wrong (wrong language, still a draft, or garbled timing): don't insert a duplicate. Call caption_list(video_id) (1u) to get the track id, then replace it with caption_update(caption_id, file_path="captions.srt") (450u — same cost gate as insert). Inserting a second same-language track instead of updating is the common mistake here.

Step 3 — The write gate (title / tags / description / thumbnail / captions)

For every fix the MCP can apply, follow the youtube-studio write-gate — preview-then-confirm, no standing auto-apply:

1. Show a clear BEFORE → AFTER diff for each field you propose to change.
2. Show cost_preview(endpoint="videos.update") (50u) and remaining quota.
3. Wait for an explicit affirmative ("yes", "go ahead"). One affirmative can cover a batched metadata write across several fields.
4. Call video_update_metadata(video_id, title=…, description=…, tags=[…]) with only the changed fields. tags is a full-list replacement — pass the complete intended list, not a delta.
   • Going private/unlisted → public requires confirm_publish=True. Treat publishing as higher-friction; confirm it on its own.
5. A thumbnail swap, if proposed, → video_set_thumbnail(video_id, path) after its own preview.
6. Caption writes (caption_insert / caption_update) — always gate behind cost_preview + explicit user approval; each call costs 400–450 units.

Never auto-apply. Never bulk-write across multiple videos without a per-video affirmative.

Step 4 — Report

Summarize three buckets:

• Passed — checks that were already good.
• Fixed — the diff applied and the units spent.
• Manual — anything the user chose to handle in Studio themselves (e.g. preferred not to spend the 400u on caption_insert), with the exact click path so they can finish it now.

This skill does NOT

• A/B test titles or thumbnails (no YouTube API support — Studio UI only).
• Auto-apply any metadata change without an explicit affirmative.
• Triage comments (that's the youtube-studio comment-triage workflow).
• Author titles/descriptions from scratch beyond proposing fixes — for a full description, defer to description-writer.

Files / skills referenced

• docs/creator-patterns.md §5 (title formulas), §6 WS3 (packaging rules).
• youtube-studio skill — auth/quota + write-gate conventions; the MCP tools and their costs.
• description-writer skill — for description (re)generation.
• create-srt-and-translate skill — English captions.srt for the caption hand-off.