Add /ultraresearch-local for structured research combining local codebase analysis with external knowledge via parallel agent swarms. Produces research briefs with triangulation, confidence ratings, and source quality assessment. New command: /ultraresearch-local with modes --quick, --local, --external, --fg. New agents: research-orchestrator (opus), docs-researcher, community-researcher, security-researcher, contrarian-researcher, gemini-bridge (all sonnet). New template: research-brief-template.md. Integration: --research flag in /ultraplan-local accepts pre-built research briefs (up to 3), enriches the interview and exploration phases. Planning orchestrator cross-references brief findings during synthesis. Design principle: Context Engineering — right information to right agent at right time. Research briefs are structured artifacts in the pipeline: ultraresearch → brief → ultraplan --research → plan → ultraexecute. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
3.5 KiB
3.5 KiB
Post Quality Scorecard (Pre-Publish Check)
Use this scorecard before publishing ANY post to predict performance.
Scoring System
Rate each criterion 0-3:
- 0 = Missing/Poor
- 1 = Basic
- 2 = Good
- 3 = Excellent
Profile Alignment (Weight: 2x)
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Topic matches your 5 core areas | /3 | Algorithm checks expertise |
| Consistent with recent content | /3 | Topical authority signal |
| Language/tone matches profile | /3 | Authenticity marker |
| Subtotal | /9 x 2 = /18 |
Hook Strength (Weight: 2x)
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Works in 140 characters | /3 | Mobile threshold |
| Creates curiosity gap | /3 | Click-through driver |
| Promises clear value | /3 | Worth reading? |
| Subtotal | /9 x 2 = /18 |
Dwell Time Potential (Weight: 1.5x)
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Length 1,200-1,800 characters | /3 | Optimal range |
| White space formatting | /3 | Easy to read |
| Encourages re-reading | /3 | Saves, bookmarks |
| Subtotal | /9 x 1.5 = /13.5 |
Engagement Triggers (Weight: 1.5x)
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| CTA invites 15+ word comments | /3 | High-value engagement |
| Shareable (others want to amplify) | /3 | Viral potential |
| Save-worthy (reference value) | /3 | Top algorithm signal |
| Subtotal | /9 x 1.5 = /13.5 |
Format Optimization (Weight: 1x)
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Right format for content | /3 | Carousel/text/image |
| Mobile-optimized | /3 | 70% mobile users |
| No external links in body | /3 | Avoid penalty |
| Subtotal | /9 x 1 = /9 |
Voice Authenticity (Weight: 1x)
| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Sounds like the author (not generic AI) | /3 | Check against voice samples |
| Uses natural contractions and phrasing | /3 | Conversational, not formal |
| Includes specific personal detail or anecdote | /3 | Personal observation or reference |
| Subtotal | /9 x 1 = /9 |
Total Score: /81
Pass/Fail Thresholds
| Score | Action |
|---|---|
| 57+ | Excellent - post with confidence |
| 46-56 | Good - consider one improvement |
| 34-45 | Review needed - improve weakest area |
| Under 34 | Don't post - rework significantly |
360Brew Validation (Critical)
Before posting, verify your profile passes the 360Brew test:
- Profile clearly shows expertise in post topic
- Headline includes relevant keywords
- Recent activity supports topical authority
- Featured section demonstrates credibility
If profile doesn't support the post topic, fix profile FIRST.
Quick Score (30-Second Version)
For quick posts, use this simplified check:
- On-topic for my expertise? (Y/N)
- Hook works in 140 chars? (Y/N)
- Clear value delivered? (Y/N)
- Ends with engagement prompt? (Y/N)
- No external links in body? (Y/N)
All 5 = Yes? -> Post it. Any No? -> Fix first.
Pre-Publish Basic Checklist
Before finalizing any post, verify:
- Hook works in first 110-140 characters
- Character count within optimal range
- Short paragraphs with white space
- Tone is authentic, not corporate
- Provides genuine value to readers
- CTA is specific and natural
- Passes the "mobile test" (readable on phone)
- Passes thought leadership test: Does it help someone make a better decision or think differently?