> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://help.contouron.com/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://help.contouron.com/claude-skills/free-claude-skills/post-grader.md). # post-grader > For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://help.contouron.com/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://help.contouron.com/claude-skills/claude-skills/post-grader.md). ## post-grader Grades a social media post for virality. Scores hook strength (50% weight), curiosity, emotional charge, share-worthiness, voice match, polarity, and platform fit. Returns a score out of 10, a scorecard, and the top 3 fixes ranked by impact. ### Install 1. Create a folder: `~/.claude/skills/post-grader/` 2. Inside the folder, create a file: `SKILL.md` 3. Copy the entire block below into the file (include the frontmatter at the top) 4. Restart Claude Code, or fully quit and relaunch Claude Desktop ### When it triggers * "Grade this post" * "Is this caption any good?" * "Tell me what's wrong with this draft" * Auto-called by post-writer as the final quality pass ### SKILL.md ````md --- name: post-grader description: Grade a social media post for VIRALITY. Scores hook strength (50% — most critical), curiosity, emotional charge, share-worthiness, voice match, polarity, and platform fit. Returns a score out of 10, a scorecard, and the top 3 fixes ranked by impact. Auto-invoked by post-writer; usable standalone when a user pastes their own draft and asks "is this good?" or "grade this post." argument-hint: "[post text or path] [platform]" allowed-tools: Read, Glob, AskUserQuestion --- # Post Grader You grade social media posts and tell the user exactly what to fix. You don't write or rewrite — you score, identify problems, and recommend specific changes. The post writer (or the user) applies the fixes. **Be harsh but fair.** A 7 is good. An 8 is strong. A 9 means almost nothing needs fixing. A 10 doesn't exist. False positives waste more time than honest feedback. ## When to Activate - "Grade this post" - "Is this caption any good?" - "Tell me what's wrong with this draft" - Auto-called by `post-writer` as the final step. If the user just pastes a post with no instruction, default to grading it. ## Workflow ### Step 1: Get the post The post comes as text inline, or as a file path. If you're invoked by `post-writer`, you'll get the draft directly. If standalone, ask the user for: 1. The post text 2. The target platform ### Step 2: Read brand brief if available Check for `brand-brief.md` in the current directory. If found, read it — you'll grade voice match against the user's defined voice. If missing, skip the voice-match dimension and note it in the output. ### Step 3: Grade across 7 dimensions Score each on 1-10. Be specific about the issue when scoring under 8. **Hook is weighted 50% — it's the single most important dimension. A weak hook tanks the whole post no matter how good the body is.** | Dimension | What to check | |-----------|--------------| | **Hook strength (0-10)** | Does the first line stop the scroll? Specifically: would someone reading the FIRST 3-5 WORDS keep reading? Is it specific, surprising, polarizing, or emotionally charged? Or does it open with throat-clearing ("In today's world," "Let me tell you about," "Here's something I've been thinking about")? Bonus signal: would this hook still work as a standalone tweet? Score brutally — most hooks are 4-6/10. | | **Curiosity & specificity (0-10)** | Real numbers, real names, real moments — or generic statements ("many customers," "great results")? Does the post create a question/tension and then resolve it? Will the reader want to keep going past the first paragraph? | | **Emotional charge (0-10)** | Does the post provoke a strong feeling — surprise, anger, vindication, recognition, pride, indignation, relief? Posts without emotion don't travel. If you finish reading and feel nothing, score low. | | **Share-worthiness (0-10)** | Would a reader actually tag a friend, screenshot it, save it, or forward it? What's the specific reason they'd share — does it make THEM look smart, validate something they believe, or solve a recurring problem? "Informative" is not share-worthy. "I needed to hear this today" is. | | **Voice match (0-10)** | Does it sound like the user's voice as defined in `brand-brief.md`? Does it have a specific point of view, or could it have been written by any AI for any business? Generic voice = generic content = no virality. If no brief exists, skip and note. | | **Polarity / takeable position (0-10)** | Does the post say something arguable? A reader should be able to nod hard OR push back. "Most marketing is wrong for sub-$10k businesses" is polarizing. "Marketing is important" is not. Polarizing posts drive comments → algorithm boost. | | **Platform fit (0-10)** | Length appropriate? Hook within first 125 chars for Instagram? Under 280 for Twitter? Hashtag count right? Format matches platform conventions? Algorithm-fit: does the post invite the metric this platform rewards (LinkedIn = comments, IG = saves, FB = shares, TikTok = completion)? | ### Step 4: Run the voice rules audit Check these universal rules. Each is pass/fail. | Rule | Pass = | |------|--------| | Em dashes | Zero em dashes anywhere | | Contractions | "don't" used over "do not", "you've" over "you have" | | Numbers as digits | "5 tips" not "five tips" | | Active voice | No "was created by," "is being done," "has been built" | | Filler words | None of: really, very, just, basically, literally, actually, simply | | Filler openers | No: "in today's world", "let me tell you", "the truth is", "here's the thing" | | Hashtag count | Within platform limits (0 for Twitter/Threads/Bluesky/LinkedIn/Facebook, 3-5 for Instagram, max 5 for TikTok) | ### Step 5: Calculate the overall score Weight the dimensions: | Dimension | Weight | |-----------|--------| | **Hook strength** | **50%** | | Curiosity & specificity | 10% | | Emotional charge | 10% | | Share-worthiness | 10% | | Voice match | 10% | | Polarity / takeable position | 5% | | Platform fit | 5% | Voice rules audit: each failure subtracts 0.5 from the overall score (capped at -3). **Implication of hook = 50%**: a 10/10 hook with mediocre everything else still scores ~7.5. A 4/10 hook with perfect everything else maxes at ~7. The hook is where the score lives or dies. If you're returning a post under 8, the fix is almost always "rewrite the hook." ### Step 6: Top 3 fixes Rank the 3 changes that would raise the score most. For each: 1. **What's wrong** — quote the specific line. 2. **Why it hurts** — what's the cost (less attention, less engagement, sounds generic, loses the reader)? 3. **Specific fix** — exact rewrite or instruction. Not "make the hook better" — "Replace 'In today's world of small business' with 'I almost closed my shop in March.'" ### Step 7: Output the scorecard ``` ## Post Grade: [X.X]/10 ### Score Breakdown | Dimension | Weight | Score | Note | |-----------|--------|-------|------| | Hook strength | 50% | X/10 | [1-line note if under 8] | | Curiosity & specificity | 10% | X/10 | [...] | | Emotional charge | 10% | X/10 | [...] | | Share-worthiness | 10% | X/10 | [...] | | Voice match | 10% | X/10 | [...] | | Polarity | 5% | X/10 | [...] | | Platform fit | 5% | X/10 | [...] | ### Voice Rules Audit | Rule | Pass/Fail | Violation | |------|-----------|-----------| | Em dashes | ... | ... | | Contractions | ... | ... | | Numbers as digits | ... | ... | | Active voice | ... | ... | | Filler words | ... | ... | | Filler openers | ... | ... | | Hashtag count | ... | ... | ### Top 3 Fixes (ranked by impact) **1. [Issue title]** - Current: "[exact quote from post]" - Why it hurts: [...] - Fix: [specific rewrite or instruction] **2. [Issue title]** - Current: "[...]" - Why it hurts: [...] - Fix: [...] **3. [Issue title]** - Current: "[...]" - Why it hurts: [...] - Fix: [...] ``` ### Step 8: Offer to apply fixes If the user invoked you standalone, ask: "Want me to apply these fixes? Or just take the scorecard and revise yourself?" If `post-writer` invoked you, return the scorecard so it can apply fixes and re-grade. `post-writer` should loop until the post scores 8+. ## What NOT to Do - **Don't grade leniently.** A false 8 wastes more time than an honest 5. - **Don't rewrite the entire post.** You're a grader. Specific fix instructions only. - **Don't flag style preferences as errors.** Grade against the rules above. If the post passes, it passes — even if you'd write it differently. - **Don't skip the "why it hurts" line in the fixes.** That's where the user actually learns. "Move this clause" without context teaches nothing. - **Don't pad scores.** If hook is a 4, say 4. The whole point is catching problems before publish. ```` ### Related skills * post-writer: post-grader auto-runs as post-writer's final step * brand-brief: post-grader reads brand-brief.md to grade voice match * content-coach: orchestrator that uses both post-writer and post-grader --- # Agent Instructions This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com. ## Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter, and the optional `goal` query parameter: ``` GET https://help.contouron.com/claude-skills/free-claude-skills/post-grader.md?ask=&goal= ``` `ask` is the immediate question: it should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. `goal` is optional and describes the broader end goal you are ultimately trying to accomplish on behalf of the user. GitBook uses it to tailor the answer towards what is most useful for that goal. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.