メニュー
Evaluates and scores influencer-brand alignment using weighted criteria including audience match, content quality, brand values, engagement authenticity, and partnership potential. Essential for prioritizing outreach.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Reviews influencer content submissions for brand safety, messaging accuracy, creative quality, and compliance before publication. Provides structured feedback to ensure content meets standards while respecting creative vision.
Helps draft and review influencer agreements covering compensation, deliverables, usage rights, exclusivity, and compliance requirements. Ensures both parties are protected with clear terms.
Manages influencer outreach including personalized pitch creation, follow-up sequences, negotiation strategies, and relationship tracking. Helps secure partnerships efficiently while building genuine connections.
Develops strategies to amplify influencer content through paid media, including whitelisting, boosting, and repurposing for ads. Maximizes reach and impact of best-performing organic content.
Optimizes landing pages for influencer-driven traffic to maximize conversions. Ensures consistency between influencer content and landing experience for better performance.
Transforms influencer content into multiple formats for use across channels including ads, website, email, and social. Maximizes the value of every piece of content created.
| name | fit-scorer |
| description | Evaluates and scores influencer-brand alignment using weighted criteria including audience match, content quality, brand values, engagement authenticity, and partnership potential. Essential for prioritizing outreach. |
This skill helps you objectively evaluate how well an influencer matches your brand by scoring them across multiple dimensions. It transforms subjective "gut feel" into data-driven partnership decisions.
Score @[handle] for [brand/campaign] and tell me if they're a good fit
Compare and rank these influencers for [campaign]:
- @influencer1
- @influencer2
- @influencer3
Score these influencers with emphasis on [engagement/audience match/content quality]:
[list of influencers]
When a user requests influencer scoring:
Define Scoring Framework
### Scoring Framework
**Brand/Campaign**: [name]
**Campaign Goal**: [awareness/consideration/conversion]
**Target Audience**: [description]
### Scoring Dimensions
| Dimension | Weight | Description |
|-----------|--------|-------------|
| Audience Match | [%] | How well their audience matches target |
| Content Quality | [%] | Production value and consistency |
| Brand Alignment | [%] | Values, aesthetic, messaging fit |
| Engagement Quality | [%] | Authenticity and depth of engagement |
| Partnership Potential | [%] | Professionalism, history, availability |
| **Total** | **100%** | |
**Scoring Scale**: 1-5 (1=Poor, 2=Below Average, 3=Average, 4=Good, 5=Excellent)
Score Audience Match
## Audience Match Score
**Influencer**: @[handle]
### Target vs. Actual Comparison
| Attribute | Target | Influencer's Audience | Match |
|-----------|--------|----------------------|-------|
| Age | [target] | [actual] | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Gender | [target] | [actual] | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Location | [target] | [actual] | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Interests | [target] | [actual] | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
| Income/Purchasing | [target] | [actual] | ✅/⚠️/❌ |
### Audience Quality Assessment
| Metric | Value | Assessment |
|--------|-------|------------|
| Real follower % | [%] | [Good/Concerning] |
| Active follower % | [%] | [Good/Concerning] |
| Bot/spam % | [%] | [Good/Concerning] |
| Audience growth | [trend] | [Organic/Suspicious] |
### Audience Match Score: [X/5]
**Justification**: [explanation]
**Weighted Score**: [X] × [weight%] = [weighted points]
Score Content Quality
## Content Quality Score
**Influencer**: @[handle]
### Production Quality
| Factor | Rating | Notes |
|--------|--------|-------|
| Visual quality | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Audio quality (if video) | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Editing skill | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Creativity | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Consistency | [1-5] | [notes] |
### Content Analysis
**Posting Frequency**: [X posts/week]
**Content Mix**: [types and %]
**Caption Quality**: [assessment]
**Hashtag Strategy**: [assessment]
### Best Content Examples
1. **[Content 1]**: [why it's good]
2. **[Content 2]**: [why it's good]
### Content Concerns
- [Concern 1 if any]
- [Concern 2 if any]
### Content Quality Score: [X/5]
**Justification**: [explanation]
**Weighted Score**: [X] × [weight%] = [weighted points]
Score Brand Alignment
## Brand Alignment Score
**Influencer**: @[handle]
### Value Alignment
| Brand Value | Influencer Alignment | Evidence |
|-------------|---------------------|----------|
| [Value 1] | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [example from content] |
| [Value 2] | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [example from content] |
| [Value 3] | ✅/⚠️/❌ | [example from content] |
### Aesthetic Alignment
| Element | Brand Style | Influencer Style | Match |
|---------|-------------|------------------|-------|
| Colors | [brand] | [influencer] | [%] |
| Tone | [brand] | [influencer] | [%] |
| Visual style | [brand] | [influencer] | [%] |
### Messaging Fit
- **Voice compatibility**: [assessment]
- **Topic relevance**: [assessment]
- **Audience overlap**: [assessment]
### Brand Safety Check
| Risk Category | Assessment | Notes |
|---------------|------------|-------|
| Political content | [Low/Medium/High] | [notes] |
| Controversial opinions | [Low/Medium/High] | [notes] |
| Competitor mentions | [Low/Medium/High] | [notes] |
| Adult content | [Low/Medium/High] | [notes] |
| Legal/regulatory | [Low/Medium/High] | [notes] |
**Overall Brand Safety**: [Safe/Proceed with caution/Risk]
### Brand Alignment Score: [X/5]
**Justification**: [explanation]
**Weighted Score**: [X] × [weight%] = [weighted points]
Score Engagement Quality
## Engagement Quality Score
**Influencer**: @[handle]
### Engagement Metrics
| Platform | Followers | Eng. Rate | Industry Avg | vs. Avg |
|----------|-----------|-----------|--------------|---------|
| [Platform 1] | [count] | [%] | [%] | [+/-] |
| [Platform 2] | [count] | [%] | [%] | [+/-] |
### Engagement Authenticity
| Indicator | Assessment | Evidence |
|-----------|------------|----------|
| Comment quality | [1-5] | [sample comments] |
| Comment diversity | [1-5] | [unique commenters] |
| Like/comment ratio | [ratio] | [normal/abnormal] |
| Engagement timing | [pattern] | [organic/suspicious] |
| Follower engagement % | [%] | [good/poor] |
### Engagement Pods/Buying Signs
- [ ] Sudden follower spikes
- [ ] Engagement from unrelated accounts
- [ ] Generic/emoji-only comments
- [ ] Inconsistent engagement patterns
- [ ] Follower/following ratio red flags
**Authenticity Assessment**: [Authentic/Some concerns/Suspicious]
### Response & Interaction
- **Responds to comments**: [Yes/Sometimes/Rarely]
- **Community building**: [Strong/Average/Weak]
- **Two-way engagement**: [assessment]
### Engagement Quality Score: [X/5]
**Justification**: [explanation]
**Weighted Score**: [X] × [weight%] = [weighted points]
Score Partnership Potential
## Partnership Potential Score
**Influencer**: @[handle]
### Partnership History
| Brand | Recency | Content Quality | Disclosure | Notes |
|-------|---------|-----------------|------------|-------|
| [Brand 1] | [date] | [rating] | [✅/❌] | [notes] |
| [Brand 2] | [date] | [rating] | [✅/❌] | [notes] |
**Observations**:
- Partnership frequency: [X per month]
- Brand category mix: [categories]
- Competitor partnerships: [details]
### Professionalism Indicators
| Factor | Assessment | Evidence |
|--------|------------|----------|
| Contact availability | [Easy/Moderate/Difficult] | [contact info] |
| Response reputation | [Responsive/Mixed/Unresponsive] | [if known] |
| Content delivery | [On time/Variable/Problematic] | [if known] |
| Creative quality in ads | [Strong/Average/Weak] | [examples] |
| Disclosure compliance | [Always/Usually/Sometimes] | [examples] |
### Exclusivity & Availability
- **Category exclusivity**: [Yes/No - details]
- **Competitor restrictions**: [details]
- **Upcoming availability**: [if known]
### Estimated Value
| Metric | Estimate | Notes |
|--------|----------|-------|
| Estimated rate | [range] | Based on [followers/engagement] |
| CPM estimate | [$X] | Industry average: [$X] |
| Value assessment | [Good/Fair/Premium] | |
### Partnership Potential Score: [X/5]
**Justification**: [explanation]
**Weighted Score**: [X] × [weight%] = [weighted points]
Calculate Final Score
## Final Fit Score
**Influencer**: @[handle]
### Score Summary
| Dimension | Raw Score | Weight | Weighted Score |
|-----------|-----------|--------|----------------|
| Audience Match | [X/5] | [%] | [points] |
| Content Quality | [X/5] | [%] | [points] |
| Brand Alignment | [X/5] | [%] | [points] |
| Engagement Quality | [X/5] | [%] | [points] |
| Partnership Potential | [X/5] | [%] | [points] |
| **Total** | | **100%** | **[X/5.00]** |
### Score Interpretation
| Score Range | Rating | Recommendation |
|-------------|--------|----------------|
| 4.5-5.0 | Excellent | Priority partner |
| 4.0-4.4 | Very Good | Strong candidate |
| 3.5-3.9 | Good | Worth pursuing |
| 3.0-3.4 | Average | Consider with caveats |
| 2.5-2.9 | Below Average | Proceed with caution |
| <2.5 | Poor | Not recommended |
### Final Rating: [X/5] - [Rating]
### Recommendation
**Verdict**: [Highly Recommended / Recommended / Consider / Pass]
**Key Strengths**:
1. [Strength 1]
2. [Strength 2]
3. [Strength 3]
**Key Concerns**:
1. [Concern 1]
2. [Concern 2]
**Best Use Case**: [what type of campaign/content]
**Expected Performance**:
- Estimated reach: [X]
- Estimated engagement: [X]
- Cost estimate: [$X]
- Projected CPE: [$X]
For Multiple Influencers - Comparison
# Influencer Comparison Report
**Campaign**: [name]
**Date**: [date]
**Influencers Evaluated**: [count]
## Ranking Summary
| Rank | Influencer | Platform | Followers | Final Score | Rating |
|------|------------|----------|-----------|-------------|--------|
| 1 | @[handle] | [platform] | [count] | [X/5] | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| 2 | @[handle] | [platform] | [count] | [X/5] | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| 3 | @[handle] | [platform] | [count] | [X/5] | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
## Detailed Comparison
| Dimension | @[handle1] | @[handle2] | @[handle3] |
|-----------|------------|------------|------------|
| Audience Match | [X/5] | [X/5] | [X/5] |
| Content Quality | [X/5] | [X/5] | [X/5] |
| Brand Alignment | [X/5] | [X/5] | [X/5] |
| Engagement Quality | [X/5] | [X/5] | [X/5] |
| Partnership Potential | [X/5] | [X/5] | [X/5] |
| **Final Score** | **[X/5]** | **[X/5]** | **[X/5]** |
## Visual Comparison
Audience Match |████████░░| |██████░░░░| |████████░░| Content Quality |██████░░░░| |████████░░| |██████░░░░| Brand Alignment |████████░░| |██████░░░░| |████████░░| Engagement |██████░░░░| |████████░░| |████████░░| Partnership |████████░░| |██████░░░░| |██████░░░░| @handle1 @handle2 @handle3
## Recommendation
**For this campaign, prioritize**:
1. **@[handle]** - [reason]
2. **@[handle]** - [reason]
**Consider combining**:
- [Influencer A] for [purpose] + [Influencer B] for [purpose]
**Pass on**:
- @[handle]: [reason]
User: "Compare these 3 influencers for our sustainable fashion brand: @ecofashionista, @greenwardrobe, @sustainablesarah"
Output: [Detailed comparison with scores, leading to clear recommendations with @sustainablesarah ranked #1 due to highest audience match and engagement authenticity]
Adjust weights based on campaign goals:
| Campaign Goal | Audience | Content | Brand | Engagement | Partnership |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Awareness | 30% | 25% | 15% | 20% | 10% |
| Engagement | 20% | 20% | 15% | 35% | 10% |
| Conversion | 35% | 15% | 20% | 20% | 10% |
| Brand Building | 20% | 25% | 30% | 15% | 10% |
| Long-term | 25% | 20% | 25% | 15% | 15% |