old-content-asset-diagnosis

name	old_content_asset_diagnosis
description	Diagnose whether an old creator post contains reusable ReCast asset value and what kind of asset it is.
stage	diagnosis

Skill: old_content_asset_diagnosis

Mission

Diagnose an old creator post as a reusable content asset.

Your job is not to summarize the post. Your job is to decide what parts of this old content can create the next content opportunity.

ReCast cares about old content only when it contains at least one reusable asset:

• a claim that can be retested
• a recommendation that can be challenged
• a comparison that can be updated
• a tutorial path that can drift
• a user question that can become a new post
• a benchmark or test structure that can be reused
• a long-tail audience signal that shows the topic is still alive

Not every testable sentence is a reusable asset. "This could be turned into a test" is only a normal content idea unless the old post already contains a clear reusable claim, test dimension, audience pull, controversy, or durable frame.

Product Decision It Supports

This skill decides whether the old content is worth passing into further ReCast research.

Core Question

Before extracting anything, ask:

"If this old post were a content asset, what exactly is reusable about it?"

Possible answers:

• The old conclusion is reusable.
• The old comparison frame is reusable.
• The old audience question is reusable.
• The old benchmark or test setup is reusable.
• The old tutorial path is reusable.
• The old controversy is reusable.
• Nothing meaningful is reusable.

Reasoning Moves

1. Identify the content asset type. Do not force every post into a formal review format.
2. Find the smallest reusable core that could become a next content task.
3. Separate reusable asset from jokes, emotion, exaggeration, and noise.
4. Identify the dependency surface: what external changes could make this old content worth revisiting.
5. Decide asset strength: strong, medium, weak, or none.

Important Rules

• Do not pretend a subjective post has a benchmark.
• For subjective posts, extract a retestable hypothesis instead.
• Do not upgrade vague subjective impressions into medium assets just because they could theoretically be tested.
• A casual note with low engagement, no concrete test dimension, and only isolated weak comments should usually be weak or none.
• A comparison frame is reusable only when it contains a clear dimension, scenario, benchmark, contrast, or strong audience pull. A bare "A feels similar to B" comparison is not enough.
• should_continue_research=true means the old content deserves external research cost. It does not mean a generic follow-up topic could be invented.
• Spam, solicitation, or unrelated comments must not strengthen asset value.
• Separate the creator's claim from audience comments.
• Do not infer missing metrics or comments.
• Do not infer a specific product/model/version that the old post did not name. If the post says "ChatGPT" without a model name, keep it as "ChatGPT" and mark the model/version as unknown.
• Do not generate the task card yet.
• Do not decide final opportunity yet.

Strength Calibration

• strong: clear reusable asset plus strong engagement, repeated demand, concrete controversy, or a well-defined benchmark/path.
• medium: clear reusable asset with enough specificity to justify research, even if the final opportunity is uncertain.
• weak: a possible topic direction exists, but the old content lacks enough specificity, engagement, or audience demand to justify research by itself.
• none: the post is mostly casual, private, spam-adjacent, too vague, or has no old-content reuse value.

Output Contribution

Produce a diagnosis that later skills can act on:

• what is reusable
• why it matters for ReCast
• what could trigger a new content opportunity
• what is uncertain
• whether further research is justified