一键在 Manus 中运行任何 Skill

$pwd:

claim-verifier

Name: Claim Verifier
Author: timescale

// Verify factual claims in a finished SEO article draft via web search. Use after de-slop and before publishing. Produces a structured claim-check report file alongside the article — does not modify the article itself. Trigger when the seo-writer pipeline reaches the verification step, or when a user asks to 'fact-check', 'verify claims', or 'check the article' before publishing.

在 Manus 中运行

$ git log --oneline --stat

stars:8

forks:7

updated:2026年5月28日 17:49

SKILL.md

readonly

name	claim-verifier
platforms	["cowork","claude-code"]
description	Verify factual claims in a finished SEO article draft via web search. Use after de-slop and before publishing. Produces a structured claim-check report file alongside the article — does not modify the article itself. Trigger when the seo-writer pipeline reaches the verification step, or when a user asks to 'fact-check', 'verify claims', or 'check the article' before publishing.
references	[]

Claim Verifier

This skill reads a finished article, extracts all verifiable factual claims, checks each one via web search, HTTP-checks all external links, and writes a structured report. The article file is never modified — the report is an editorial action list for the human reviewer.

When to use this skill

The seo-writer pipeline has completed writing, review, revisions, and de-slop, and needs a verification pass before optimize-meta-tags
A user asks to "fact-check," "verify claims in," or "check the stats in" a finished article
An article contains competitor version claims, deprecation dates, customer proof points, or third-party benchmarks that should be confirmed before publishing

When NOT to use this skill

Before de-slop is complete (de-slop may rewrite claims — always verify the final prose)
For Tiger Data product features (Tiger Docs verification happens during seo-article-writer, not here)
For internal Tiger Den links (seo-article-writer already verifies these)

Step 0: Pre-flight

Call marketing-preflight with args claim-verifier. Do not proceed until it completes successfully. If it stops with an error, follow its instructions and stop.

Step 1: Read the article and extract claims

Read the full article file. Identify every verifiable factual claim. Organize into five categories:

1. Statistical claims — specific numbers, percentages, ratios, benchmarks Examples: "92% memory reduction", "10-20x better RAM efficiency", "query time dropped from 6.4s to 30ms", "90–95% compression"

2. Product and version claims — version numbers, release dates, feature availability, pricing model descriptions Examples: "Mimir v3.0, released November 2025", "InfluxDB 3 uses InfluxQL and SQL, not Flux", "instance-based pricing billed hourly"

3. Deprecation and EOL claims — products deprecated, services closed, EOL dates announced Examples: "AWS closed Timestream LiveAnalytics to new customers in June 2025", "Promscale was deprecated in 2023"

4. Competitive architectural claims — "X doesn't support Y", hard limits, capability gaps Examples: "InfluxDB Cloud Serverless documents a soft limit of approximately 10 million unique series keys", "QuestDB does not support continuous aggregates natively"

5. Customer proof points — named customer quotes or attributed performance metrics Examples: "FlightAware reduced query time from 6.4 seconds to 30 milliseconds", "Skylab went from a 64-core, 512 GB RAM machine to a 4-core, 16 GB RAM setup"

Do not include:

Tiger Data's own product feature descriptions (verified by seo-article-writer via Tiger Docs)
Claims already qualified with "reported", "community benchmarks suggest", or other hedging language that makes them non-assertive
Internal Tiger Den links

Step 2: Verify each claim via web search

For each claim, run a targeted web search to find the most authoritative public source. Use official sources first:

Official product documentation or changelog (e.g., Grafana Labs release notes for Mimir claims)
Official press releases or announcements (e.g., AWS blog for Timestream deprecation)
Case study pages on tigerdata.com for customer proof points
GitHub repositories or READMEs for open-source project claims

Assign one of three verdicts to each claim:

✅ Verified — Found a reliable source that confirms the claim as stated. Record the source URL. If the article does not already link to an authoritative source at that point in the text, flag it as needing an inline citation.
⚠️ Needs attention — Found a source that contradicts the claim, or the claim is outdated/inaccurate. Provide the correct information and source URL.
❓ Unverifiable — No reliable public source found. The claim may be accurate but cannot be confirmed. Recommend softening language (e.g., "reported", "according to community benchmarks", "as of this writing").

Inline citation check: For every verified claim, check whether the article already provides a hyperlink to an authoritative source at or near that claim. Tiger Data internal links (tigerdata.com/blog, tigerdata.com/case-studies, etc.) count as citations for Tiger Data's own data and customer proof points. External claims (competitor stats, third-party benchmarks, product version facts) need external links. If a verified claim has no nearby link to its source, add it to a "Missing citations" section in the report.

Efficiency note: If multiple claims reference the same product or event (e.g., several claims about Mimir v3.0), search once and apply findings across all related claims.

Step 3: HTTP-check external links

For every external URL in the article (non-Tiger Data URLs — anything not on tigerdata.com or docs.timescale.com):

Issue a HEAD request to check HTTP status
Record the result: ✅ 200 OK, ⚠️ 301/302 redirect (note destination), ❌ 404/error

Use the Bash tool:

curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" -L --max-time 10 "{URL}"

Run these checks in parallel where possible to avoid slow sequential execution.

Step 4: Write the report

Determine the slug from the article filename (e.g., prometheus-alternatives.md → slug is prometheus-alternatives). Write the report to {article-directory}/{slug}-claim-check.md.

Use this exact format:

# Claim Verification Report — {Article H1 Title}

*Article: `{file_path}` | Verified: {YYYY-MM-DD}*

## Summary

- {N} claims verified ✅
- {N} claims need attention ⚠️
- {N} claims unverifiable — recommend softening ❓
- {N} missing inline citations
- {N} external links checked ({N} OK, {N} flagged)

## Verified claims

| Claim (as written in article) | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | [Source title](URL) | ✅ Confirmed |

## Claims needing attention

| Claim (as written) | Issue | Recommended update |
|---|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | {What's wrong} | Replace with: "{corrected text}" |

## Unverifiable claims — recommend softening

| Claim (as written) | Suggested revision |
|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | "{softened version}" |

## Missing inline citations

Verified claims that have no nearby hyperlink to an authoritative source in the article body. Add a link at the point of the claim.

| Claim (as written) | Suggested source to link |
|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | [Source title](URL) |

## External links

| URL | Status |
|---|---|
| https://... | ✅ 200 OK |
| https://... | ⚠️ 301 → {destination} |
| https://... | ❌ 404 — remove or replace |

If a category has no entries, omit that section entirely. Do not write empty tables.

Step 5: Return summary to calling agent

After writing the report, return this summary to the calling agent (seo-writer or user):

Claim verification complete — {N} verified, {N} flagged, {N} unverifiable, {N} missing inline citations. Report: {claim-check-file-path}

[If any ⚠️, ❓, or missing citation items]: The following need attention before publishing:

{Claim}: {one-line issue summary}

...

[If all clear]: All claims verified. No open items.

related-skills.json

同仓库

social-article-writer.md

from "timescale/marketing-skills"

Convert blog posts and Tiger Den content into native long-form articles for LinkedIn, X (Twitter), or both — with matching social posts. Produces platform-appropriate outputs: LinkedIn gets an SEO title, SEO description, article body with closing CTA, and a social post; X gets an article body and a companion post. Handles both Tiger Den content items and raw blog drafts. Use this skill when the user asks to turn a blog post into a LinkedIn article, write an X article, write a Twitter article, create long-form content for social platforms, or says 'social article,' 'LinkedIn article,' 'X article,' or 'repurpose this for LinkedIn/Twitter.' For short social posts only (not articles), use social-post-writer instead.

2026-05-298

event-lead-enrichment.md

from "timescale/marketing-skills"

Enrich event booth-scan lead CSVs with Common Room firmographics, score them by ICP fit and conversation heat, flag Tiger Data customers, and produce a tiered xlsx for SDR follow-up. Use this skill when the user asks to enrich event leads, score booth scans, process a post-event lead list, or run lead enrichment for a conference/trade show. Also trigger when they mention 'GrafanCON leads', 'Hannover Messe leads', 'booth scan enrichment', 'tier the leads', or provide a lead CSV after an event.

2026-05-298

seo-article-writer.md

from "timescale/marketing-skills"

Write SEO-optimized articles from a brief with automated Tiger Docs verification, competitive fact-checking, internal link discovery, and auto-triggered content review. Use this skill when the user says 'SEO article', 'SEO content', 'GEO article', 'AEO article', 'SEO brief', or 'content brief for SEO'. Does NOT trigger for generic blog posts, comparison posts, or roundups unless explicitly labeled SEO/GEO/AEO.

2026-05-268

social-post-writer.md

from "timescale/marketing-skills"

Plan social media campaigns and draft individual posts for LinkedIn and X (Twitter), including repurposing existing content into platform-native social posts. Use this skill when the user asks to create a social media calendar, plan a LinkedIn content series, write social posts, draft a tweet or X thread, repurpose a blog post for social, turn an article into LinkedIn posts, create a social campaign, or plan social content cadence. Also trigger when they mention social media strategy, content calendar, post series, LinkedIn carousel outline, X thread, hashtag strategy, or ask 'what should we post about [topic]?' For voice and tone guidance, this skill defers to brand-voice-writer. For social posts within an event campaign, use event-brief-planner instead.

2026-05-228

event-brief-planner.md

from "timescale/marketing-skills"

Plan and write complete event campaign briefs for Tiger Data -- event overview, full campaign copy (landing pages, emails, social posts, ads, banners, newsletters), and KPI tracking. Use this skill when the user asks to plan an event campaign, create an event brief, write event marketing assets, or fill out the event campaign template. Also trigger when they mention field event, tradeshow, conference, webinar, event landing page, pre-event email, post-event email, event social posts, event paid ads, booth marketing, event campaign copy, or 'what marketing do we need for [event]?' For writing individual assets in isolation (not as part of an event brief), use brand-voice-writer instead.

2026-05-228

newsletter-writer.md

from "timescale/marketing-skills"

Plan and draft the bi-weekly Tiger Data developer newsletter. Use this skill when the user asks to write a newsletter, plan a newsletter edition, draft newsletter copy, create a newsletter issue, assemble newsletter content, or says 'it's newsletter time.' Sources recent blog posts, tutorials, case studies, and community content from Tiger Den, then drafts each section in brand voice with UTM-tagged links. Also trigger when the user mentions email newsletter, developer newsletter, bi-weekly newsletter, newsletter content, or newsletter draft.

2026-05-228

package.json

"author": "timescale"

"repository": "timescale/marketing-skills"

打开 GitHub 仓库查看创作者相关仓库

$ install --global

$ download --local

在 Manus 中运行

name	claim-verifier
platforms	["cowork","claude-code"]
description	Verify factual claims in a finished SEO article draft via web search. Use after de-slop and before publishing. Produces a structured claim-check report file alongside the article — does not modify the article itself. Trigger when the seo-writer pipeline reaches the verification step, or when a user asks to 'fact-check', 'verify claims', or 'check the article' before publishing.
references	[]

Claim Verifier

When to use this skill

The seo-writer pipeline has completed writing, review, revisions, and de-slop, and needs a verification pass before optimize-meta-tags
A user asks to "fact-check," "verify claims in," or "check the stats in" a finished article
An article contains competitor version claims, deprecation dates, customer proof points, or third-party benchmarks that should be confirmed before publishing

When NOT to use this skill

Before de-slop is complete (de-slop may rewrite claims — always verify the final prose)
For Tiger Data product features (Tiger Docs verification happens during seo-article-writer, not here)
For internal Tiger Den links (seo-article-writer already verifies these)

Step 0: Pre-flight

Call marketing-preflight with args claim-verifier. Do not proceed until it completes successfully. If it stops with an error, follow its instructions and stop.

Step 1: Read the article and extract claims

Read the full article file. Identify every verifiable factual claim. Organize into five categories:

Do not include:

Tiger Data's own product feature descriptions (verified by seo-article-writer via Tiger Docs)
Claims already qualified with "reported", "community benchmarks suggest", or other hedging language that makes them non-assertive
Internal Tiger Den links

Step 2: Verify each claim via web search

For each claim, run a targeted web search to find the most authoritative public source. Use official sources first:

Official product documentation or changelog (e.g., Grafana Labs release notes for Mimir claims)
Official press releases or announcements (e.g., AWS blog for Timestream deprecation)
Case study pages on tigerdata.com for customer proof points
GitHub repositories or READMEs for open-source project claims

Assign one of three verdicts to each claim:

✅ Verified — Found a reliable source that confirms the claim as stated. Record the source URL. If the article does not already link to an authoritative source at that point in the text, flag it as needing an inline citation.
⚠️ Needs attention — Found a source that contradicts the claim, or the claim is outdated/inaccurate. Provide the correct information and source URL.
❓ Unverifiable — No reliable public source found. The claim may be accurate but cannot be confirmed. Recommend softening language (e.g., "reported", "according to community benchmarks", "as of this writing").

Efficiency note: If multiple claims reference the same product or event (e.g., several claims about Mimir v3.0), search once and apply findings across all related claims.

Step 3: HTTP-check external links

For every external URL in the article (non-Tiger Data URLs — anything not on tigerdata.com or docs.timescale.com):

Issue a HEAD request to check HTTP status
Record the result: ✅ 200 OK, ⚠️ 301/302 redirect (note destination), ❌ 404/error

Use the Bash tool:

curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" -L --max-time 10 "{URL}"

Run these checks in parallel where possible to avoid slow sequential execution.

Step 4: Write the report

Determine the slug from the article filename (e.g., prometheus-alternatives.md → slug is prometheus-alternatives). Write the report to {article-directory}/{slug}-claim-check.md.

Use this exact format:

# Claim Verification Report — {Article H1 Title}

*Article: `{file_path}` | Verified: {YYYY-MM-DD}*

## Summary

- {N} claims verified ✅
- {N} claims need attention ⚠️
- {N} claims unverifiable — recommend softening ❓
- {N} missing inline citations
- {N} external links checked ({N} OK, {N} flagged)

## Verified claims

| Claim (as written in article) | Source | Status |
|---|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | [Source title](URL) | ✅ Confirmed |

## Claims needing attention

| Claim (as written) | Issue | Recommended update |
|---|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | {What's wrong} | Replace with: "{corrected text}" |

## Unverifiable claims — recommend softening

| Claim (as written) | Suggested revision |
|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | "{softened version}" |

## Missing inline citations

Verified claims that have no nearby hyperlink to an authoritative source in the article body. Add a link at the point of the claim.

| Claim (as written) | Suggested source to link |
|---|---|
| "{exact quote}" | [Source title](URL) |

## External links

| URL | Status |
|---|---|
| https://... | ✅ 200 OK |
| https://... | ⚠️ 301 → {destination} |
| https://... | ❌ 404 — remove or replace |

If a category has no entries, omit that section entirely. Do not write empty tables.

Step 5: Return summary to calling agent

After writing the report, return this summary to the calling agent (seo-writer or user):

Claim verification complete — {N} verified, {N} flagged, {N} unverifiable, {N} missing inline citations. Report: {claim-check-file-path}

[If any ⚠️, ❓, or missing citation items]: The following need attention before publishing:

{Claim}: {one-line issue summary}

...

[If all clear]: All claims verified. No open items.

claim-verifier

Claim Verifier

When to use this skill

When NOT to use this skill

Step 0: Pre-flight

Step 1: Read the article and extract claims

Step 2: Verify each claim via web search

Step 3: HTTP-check external links

Step 4: Write the report

Step 5: Return summary to calling agent

同仓库更多 Skills

同仓库更多 Skills

Claim Verifier

When to use this skill

When NOT to use this skill

Step 0: Pre-flight

Step 1: Read the article and extract claims

Step 2: Verify each claim via web search

Step 3: HTTP-check external links

Step 4: Write the report

Step 5: Return summary to calling agent