x-impact-checker

name

x-impact-checker

description

Analyze X (Twitter) posts for viral potential using the actual recommendation algorithm. Use when user wants to: (1) Check if a post will go viral, (2) Optimize a tweet for engagement, (3) Improve post performance. Triggers: "Check if this will go viral", "Make this post buzz", "Will this tweet perform well?", "Optimize my tweet", "How can I make this viral?", "バズるかチェックして", "Xでバズる投稿にして", "伸びるかチェックして", "この投稿を伸ばして", "投稿を改善して", "ツイートを最適化して"

X Impact Checker

Analyze X posts for viral potential based on the open-source recommendation algorithm (19-element scoring system).

Scoring System (100 points)

Tier 1: Core Engagement (60 points)

Conversation drivers and strong sharing signals.

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)

Media interactions and sustained attention metrics.

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)

Author discovery and long-term value signals.

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

Use emojis throughout the report for better visual clarity and engagement.

Progress Tracking

Use TodoWrite tool to show analysis progress with these tasks:

1. Analyzing post content (in_progress → completed)

   • activeForm: "Analyzing post content"
   • content: "Analyze post content"

2. Calculating scores across all elements (in_progress → completed)

   • activeForm: "Calculating scores across all elements"
   • content: "Calculate scores across all elements"

3. Generating top 5 priority improvements (in_progress → completed)

   • activeForm: "Generating top 5 priority improvements"
   • content: "Generate top 5 priority improvements"

4. Creating optimized version (in_progress → completed)

   • activeForm: "Creating optimized version"
   • content: "Create optimized version"

Mark each task as completed immediately after finishing that step.

Report Structure

1. Score: 🎯 XX/100 (Grade: X)

2. Breakdown Table:

| Category | Factor | Score | Max | Assessment |
|----------|--------|-------|-----|------------|
| **💬 Core Engagement** | | | 60 | |
| | 💭 Reply Potential | X/22 | 22 | [reason] |
| | 🔄 Retweet Potential | X/16 | 16 | [reason] |
| | ❤️ Favorite Potential | X/12 | 12 | [reason] |
| | 💬 Quote Potential | X/10 | 10 | [reason] |
| **⏱️ Extended Engagement** | | | 25 | |
| | 👀 Dwell Time | X/6 | 6 | [reason] |
| | ⏳ Continuous Dwell Time | X/4 | 4 | [reason] |
| | 🔗 Click Potential | X/5 | 5 | [reason] |
| | 🖼️ Photo Expand | X/4 | 4 | [reason] |
| | 🎥 Video View | X/3 | 3 | [reason] |
| | 🔍 Quoted Click | X/3 | 3 | [reason] |
| **🤝 Relationship Building** | | | 15 | |
| | 👤 Profile Click | X/5 | 5 | [reason] |
| | ➕ Follow Potential | X/4 | 4 | [reason] |
| | 📤 Share Potential | X/2 | 2 | [reason] |
| | 💌 Share via DM | X/2 | 2 | [reason] |
| | 📋 Share via Link | X/2 | 2 | [reason] |
| **⚠️ Negative Signals** | | | | |
| | 😐 Not Interested Risk | -X | 0 to -15 | [reason] |
| | 🔇 Mute Risk | -X | 0 to -15 | [reason] |
| | 🚫 Block Risk | -X | 0 to -25 | [reason] |
| | 🚨 Report Risk | -X | 0 to -30 | [reason] |
| **🏆 TOTAL** | | **XX/100** | | **Grade: X** |

3. 📈 Top 5 Priority Improvements: Specific, actionable suggestions across different categories

   • Use emojis like ✅, 💡, 🎯 to highlight key improvements

4. ✨ Optimized Version: Rewritten post with improvements applied (in original language)

Detailed Scoring Criteria & Improvement Strategies

Tier 1: Core Engagement

Reply Potential (22 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Direct questions: "What do you think?", "How would you solve this?"
• Debatable claims: "X is better than Y"
• Opinion invitations: "Agree or disagree?"
• Open-ended prompts
• Controversial but thoughtful statements

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Just shipped a new feature."
• ⚠️ Better: "Just shipped a new feature. Thoughts?"
• ✅ Best: "Should features ship fast but buggy, or slow but stable? We chose speed—was it the right call?"

Retweet Potential (16 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Actionable insights: "Here's how..."
• Surprising facts: "X% of developers don't know..."
• Numbered lists: "3 ways to...", "10 lessons from..."
• Data-driven content
• Shareable takeaways
• Universal truths

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "I learned something today."
• ⚠️ Better: "I learned React hooks can reduce bundle size by 30%."
• ✅ Best: "🧵 3 React patterns that cut my bundle size by 30%:\n\n1. Lazy loading hooks\n2. Code splitting by route\n3. Tree-shaking unused exports"

Favorite Potential (12 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Emotional resonance: joy, frustration, triumph
• Personal stories: "When I was..."
• Relatable moments: "We've all been there..."
• Inspirational content
• Vulnerability and authenticity
• Useful references worth saving

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Debugging is hard."
• ⚠️ Better: "Spent 3 hours debugging a typo."
• ✅ Best: "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 😅"

Quote Potential (10 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Strong opinions: "X is dead", "Y is overrated"
• Challenges conventional wisdom
• Invites commentary and counter-arguments
• Takes clear stance on controversial topics
• Thought-provoking perspectives

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "TypeScript is useful."
• ⚠️ Better: "TypeScript prevents bugs."
• ✅ Best: "TypeScript's biggest value isn't catching bugs—it's documentation. The type errors are just a bonus. Fight me."

---

Tier 2: Extended Engagement

Dwell Time (6 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Long-form content requiring reading time
• Detailed explanations with examples
• Technical depth
• Multi-paragraph structure
• Educational content

Improvement Strategies:

• Add concrete examples: "For instance, when building X..."
• Include numbers and data: "This reduced latency from 200ms to 50ms"
• Structure with clear sections

Continuous Dwell Time (4 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Thread indicators: "🧵", "Thread:", "1/", numbered series
• Narrative structure: beginning, middle, end
• Complexity requiring re-reading
• Educational depth with layers
• Story arcs that unfold
• "And then..." structures

Difference from Dwell Time:

• Dwell Time: Initial reading duration (how long to read once)
• Continuous Dwell Time: Sustained attention (re-reading, contemplation, multi-part consumption)

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Here's how I built X. [long explanation]"
• ⚠️ Better: "🧵 How I built X in 30 days"
• ✅ Best: "🧵 How I went from idea to $10k MRR in 30 days (1/8)\n\nDay 1-7: Validation\nDays 8-14: MVP\nDays 15-30: Launch\n\nHere's what nobody tells you..."

Click Potential (5 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Link presence and context quality
• Call-to-action strength: "Read more", "Discover", "Learn how"
• Preview/teaser effectiveness
• Curiosity gap creation: "The results were shocking..."
• Clear value proposition

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "https://example.com/article"
• ⚠️ Better: "Read more here: [link]"
• ✅ Best: "How I 10xed revenue in 3 months (full breakdown with screenshots): [link]"

Photo Expand Potential (4 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Image markers: [photo], [image], "pic.twitter.com"
• Visual language: "see", "look", "view", "check this out"
• Emojis suggesting visuals: 📸, 🎨, 👀, 📷, 🖼️
• Before/after comparisons
• Multiple image storytelling: "Swipe through..."
• Visual evidence: "Here's proof 👇"

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "My dashboard looks great now."
• ⚠️ Better: "Check out my new dashboard design."
• ✅ Best: "Before/after of my analytics dashboard redesign 👇\n\nWent from cluttered mess to clean insights in 2 days.\n\n[visual indicators suggest images present]"

Video View Potential (3 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Video markers: [video], "▶️", "watch", "tutorial", "demo"
• Duration hints: "2-min", "quick demo", "full walkthrough"
• Content preview describing what viewers will see
• Timestamp highlights: "Skip to 1:30 for..."
• Hook/teaser: "Wait for the ending..."

VQV Eligibility (Conditional): Full scoring (3 points) applies only if video appears to be >5 seconds (long-form). Inferred from: "full tutorial", "in-depth", "complete guide" vs "quick clip", "snippet"

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Made a video."
• ⚠️ Better: "Watch my new tutorial ▶️"
• ✅ Best: "Full 8-minute breakdown: How to build this UI in Next.js ▶️\n\n0:00 Setup\n2:15 Components\n5:30 Animations\n\nBest part at 6:45"

Quoted Click Potential (3 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Provocative but incomplete statements
• Statistics or claims needing verification
• Hot takes inviting source investigation: "80% of startups fail because..."
• "Wait, what?" factor creating curiosity
• Source credibility questions
• Bold claims: "This changes everything"

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Read this interesting study about developer productivity."
• ⚠️ Better: "New study shows remote developers are 20% more productive."
• ✅ Best: "New Stanford study: Remote developers write 35% more code but with 50% fewer bugs.\n\nThis destroys the 'office collaboration' myth."

---

Tier 3: Relationship Building

Profile Click (5 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Creates author curiosity: "Who is this person?"
• Demonstrates expertise: "I built X at Y company"
• Shows unique perspective or background
• Credibility signals: credentials, experience
• Intriguing bio-worthy content

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "I think React is good."
• ⚠️ Better: "After 5 years with React, I think it's good."
• ✅ Best: "After architecting React apps for Airbnb, Netflix, and 50+ startups, here's what I wish I knew on day one:"

Follow Potential (4 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Demonstrates ongoing value: "I ship weekly tutorials on..."
• Shows consistent expertise
• Promises future content: "More on this tomorrow"
• Establishes content cadence
• Creates expectation of quality

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Here's a React tip."
• ⚠️ Better: "Here's a React tip. I post these daily."
• ✅ Best: "React tip #47: [insight]\n\nI break down advanced React patterns every Monday. Following along? Tomorrow's is about suspense boundaries."

Share Potential (2 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• General sharing value to broader audience
• Universal relevance
• Broad appeal across communities

Improvement Strategies:

• Make universally relevant, not niche-specific
• Focus on common problems everyone faces

Share via DM (2 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Personal relevance: "Tag someone who...", "Send this to..."
• Inside jokes or shared experiences
• Emotional resonance for 1-on-1 sharing: "This is so you 😂"
• Relatable scenarios: "We all have that friend..."
• "You need to see this" quality

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Debugging is frustrating."
• ⚠️ Better: "Debugging production issues is stressful."
• ✅ Best: "Tag your developer friend who 'just quickly fixes' production on Friday at 5pm and breaks everything 😂"

Share via Copy Link (2 points)

Evaluation Criteria:

• Reference value: guides, lists, frameworks, cheatsheets
• Evergreen quality (not time-sensitive)
• Professional sharing context (Slack, email, bookmarks)
• "Save this" or "Bookmark" language
• Educational/tutorial content
• Resource library worthy

Improvement Strategies:

• ❌ Bad: "Here are some Git commands I use."
• ⚠️ Better: "Useful Git commands for daily work."
• ✅ Best: "📌 Bookmark this: 15 Git commands that saved me 100+ hours this year\n\n[Well-structured list with examples]\n\nPrint this and keep it next to your monitor."

---

Score Normalization

The algorithm applies normalization to balance positive and negative signals:

Final Score = Base Score (0-100) + Penalties (-75 to 0)
Normalized Score = max(0, min(100, Final Score))

Penalty Capping:

• Total penalties ≤ -20: Applied at full weight
• Total penalties > -20: Gradual dampening begins
• Total penalties > -75: Hard cap at -75 to prevent over-penalization

This prevents a single negative signal from completely dominating the score while maintaining their importance in the algorithm.

---

Text Analysis Limitations

This skill performs heuristic text-based analysis, not ML prediction.

What This Skill Cannot Detect

Missing Metadata:

• Actual media presence (photos, videos)
• Real video duration or quality
• Actual click-through rates
• True engagement metrics
• Author reputation/follower count
• Tweet timestamps or virality history

Cannot Access:

• Phoenix ML model predictions
• User interaction history
• Network graph relationships
• Real-time engagement signals

What This Skill Infers From

Text-Based Heuristics:

• Language patterns and structure
• Content formatting (threads, lists, etc.)
• Emotional tone and style
• Visual indicators (emojis, markdown)
• Call-to-action strength
• Question vs. statement structure

Scoring Approach:

• Conservative: Unknown elements get baseline scores
• Pattern-Based: Detects language cues (e.g., 📸 for photos, 🧵 for threads)
• Optimization-Focused: Best used for pre-publishing content improvement

Best Use Case

Pre-publishing optimization to maximize engagement potential, not post-hoc analytics or prediction of actual engagement numbers.

---

Language Handling

Detect input language. Respond in same language. Keep optimized version in original language.

Bilingual Display for Category and Factor Names

When input is in Japanese:

• Display Category and Factor names as: 日本語訳（English Original）
• Examples:
  • Category: コアエンゲージメント（Core Engagement）
  • Factor: 返信潜在力（Reply Potential）
  • Factor: リツイート潜在力（Retweet Potential）

When input is in English:

• Display Category and Factor names in English only
• Examples:
  • Category: Core Engagement
  • Factor: Reply Potential

Japanese translations with emojis for reference:

• 💬 Core Engagement → コアエンゲージメント
• ⏱️ Extended Engagement → 拡張エンゲージメント
• 🤝 Relationship Building → 関係構築
• ⚠️ Negative Signals → ネガティブシグナル
• 💭 Reply Potential → 返信潜在力
• 🔄 Retweet Potential → リツイート潜在力
• ❤️ Favorite Potential → いいね潜在力
• 💬 Quote Potential → 引用潜在力
• 👀 Dwell Time → 滞在時間
• ⏳ Continuous Dwell Time → 継続滞在時間
• 🔗 Click Potential → クリック潜在力
• 🖼️ Photo Expand → 写真展開潜在力
• 🎥 Video View → 動画視聴潜在力
• 🔍 Quoted Click → 引用クリック潜在力
• 👤 Profile Click → プロフィールクリック
• ➕ Follow Potential → フォロー潜在力
• 📤 Share Potential → 共有潜在力
• 💌 Share via DM → DM経由共有
• 📋 Share via Link → リンクコピー共有
• 😐 Not Interested Risk → 興味なしリスク
• 🔇 Mute Risk → ミュートリスク
• 🚫 Block Risk → ブロックリスク
• 🚨 Report Risk → 報告リスク

Algorithm Reference

See references/algorithm-weights.md for complete weight details from X's open-source algorithm (19-element system).