X Impact Checker
X（Twitter）传播潜力分析器
Analyze X posts for viral potential based on the open-source recommendation algorithm (19-element scoring system).
基于开源推荐算法（19项评分体系）分析X（Twitter）帖子的病毒式传播潜力。
Scoring System (100 points)
评分体系（满分100分）
Tier 1: Core Engagement (60 points)
第一层级：核心互动（60分）
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 |
驱动对话与强分享信号的指标。
| 指标 | 满分 | 评分指南 |
|---|
| 回复潜力 | 22 | 22分：直接提问/有争议的观点；12分：邀请回复；4分：仅陈述事实 |
| 转发潜力 | 16 | 16分：可落地的见解/令人惊讶的事实；8分：有趣但小众；0分：无分享价值 |
| 点赞潜力 | 12 | 12分：情感共鸣/个人故事；6分：实用参考；0分：吸引力低 |
| 引用潜力 | 10 | 10分：强烈观点引发评论；5分：发人深省；0分：无引用价值 |
Tier 2: Extended Engagement (25 points)
第二层级：扩展互动（25分）
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 |
媒体互动与持续关注度指标。
| 指标 | 满分 | 评分指南 |
|---|
| 停留时长 | 6 | 6分：长文/详细内容；3分：中等深度；0分：可快速浏览 |
| 持续停留时长 | 4 | 4分：需要持续关注的推文线程/叙事结构；2分：中等复杂度；0分：快速阅读内容 |
| 点击潜力 | 5 | 5分：带有明确行动号召的吸引力链接；3分：带上下文的链接；1分：纯URL；0分：无链接 |
| 图片展开潜力 | 4 | 4分：多图/视觉叙事；2分：单图参考；0分：无视觉内容 |
| 视频观看潜力 | 3 | 3分：带钩子的长视频（>5秒）；2分：短视频片段；0分：无视频 |
| 引用点击潜力 | 3 | 3分：大胆观点引发验证；2分：有趣观点；0分：内容自洽无需验证 |
Tier 3: Relationship Building (15 points)
第三层级：关系构建（15分）
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 |
作者曝光与长期价值信号的指标。
| 指标 | 满分 | 评分指南 |
|---|
| 主页点击潜力 | 5 | 5分：引发对作者的好奇心；3分：展示专业能力；0分：通用语气 |
| 关注潜力 | 4 | 4分：展示持续价值；2分：有潜力；0分：一次性内容 |
| 分享潜力 | 2 | 2分：适合广泛分享；1分：受众有限；0分：无分享价值 |
| 私信分享潜力 | 2 | 2分：个人化/适合“发给朋友”的内容；1分：一定相关性；0分：通用内容 |
| 链接分享潜力 | 2 | 2分：值得参考/收藏；1分：实用但非常青内容；0分：时效性强的内容 |
Penalties (subtract from total)
扣分项（从总分中扣除）
| 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 |
| 风险 | 扣分范围 | 触发条件 |
|---|
| 无兴趣风险 | -5至-15 | 标题党、无关内容 |
| 静音风险 | -5至-15 | 重复内容、令人反感的模式 |
| 拉黑风险 | -10至-25 | 冒犯性、攻击性语气 |
| 举报风险 | -15至-30 | 违反平台政策、垃圾内容信号 |
| 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) |
| 分数 | 评级 |
|---|
| 90-100 | S（优秀） |
| 75-89 | A（良好） |
| 60-74 | B（中等） |
| 45-59 | C（一般） |
| 30-44 | D（较差） |
| 0-29 | F（低潜力） |
Use emojis throughout the report for better visual clarity and engagement.
Use TodoWrite tool to show analysis progress with these tasks:
-
Analyzing post content (in_progress → completed)
- activeForm: "Analyzing post content"
- content: "Analyze post content"
-
Calculating scores across all elements (in_progress → completed)
- activeForm: "Calculating scores across all elements"
- content: "Calculate scores across all elements"
-
Generating top 5 priority improvements (in_progress → completed)
- activeForm: "Generating top 5 priority improvements"
- content: "Generate top 5 priority improvements"
-
Creating optimized version (in_progress → completed)
- activeForm: "Creating optimized version"
- content: "Create optimized version"
Mark each task as completed immediately after finishing that step.
使用TodoWrite工具展示分析进度，包含以下任务：
-
分析帖子内容（进行中 → 已完成）
- activeForm: "Analyzing post content"
- content: "Analyze post content"
-
计算所有指标的分数（进行中 → 已完成）
- activeForm: "Calculating scores across all elements"
- content: "Calculate scores across all elements"
-
生成Top 5优先级优化建议（进行中 → 已完成）
- activeForm: "Generating top 5 priority improvements"
- content: "Generate top 5 priority improvements"
-
创建优化后的版本（进行中 → 已完成）
- activeForm: "Creating optimized version"
- content: "Create optimized version"
完成每个步骤后立即标记为已完成。
-
-
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** |
-
📈 Top 5 Priority Improvements: Specific, actionable suggestions across different categories
- Use emojis like ✅, 💡, 🎯 to highlight key improvements
-
✨ Optimized Version: Rewritten post with improvements applied (in original language)
-
-
分数明细表格:
| 分类 | 指标 | 得分 | 满分 | 评估 |
|----------|--------|-------|-----|------------|
| **💬 核心互动** | | | 60 | |
| | 💭 回复潜力 | X/22 | 22 | [理由] |
| | 🔄 转发潜力 | X/16 | 16 | [理由] |
| | ❤️ 点赞潜力 | X/12 | 12 | [理由] |
| | 💬 引用潜力 | X/10 | 10 | [理由] |
| **⏱️ 扩展互动** | | | 25 | |
| | 👀 停留时长 | X/6 | 6 | [理由] |
| | ⏳ 持续停留时长 | X/4 | 4 | [理由] |
| | 🔗 点击潜力 | X/5 | 5 | [理由] |
| | 🖼️ 图片展开 | X/4 | 4 | [理由] |
| | 🎥 视频观看 | X/3 | 3 | [理由] |
| | 🔍 引用点击 | X/3 | 3 | [理由] |
| **🤝 关系构建** | | | 15 | |
| | 👤 主页点击 | X/5 | 5 | [理由] |
| | ➕ 关注潜力 | X/4 | 4 | [理由] |
| | 📤 分享潜力 | X/2 | 2 | [理由] |
| | 💌 私信分享 | X/2 | 2 | [理由] |
| | 📋 链接分享 | X/2 | 2 | [理由] |
| **⚠️ 负面信号** | | | | |
| | 😐 无兴趣风险 | -X | 0至-15 | [理由] |
| | 🔇 静音风险 | -X | 0至-15 | [理由] |
| | 🚫 拉黑风险 | -X | 0至-25 | [理由] |
| | 🚨 举报风险 | -X | 0至-30 | [理由] |
| **🏆 总分** | | **XX/100** | | **评级：X** |
-
📈 Top 5优先级优化建议: 针对不同分类的具体、可操作建议
-
✨ 优化后的版本: 应用优化建议后的重写帖子（保留原语言）
Detailed Scoring Criteria & Improvement Strategies
详细评分标准与优化策略
Tier 1: Core Engagement
第一层级：核心互动
Reply Potential (22 points)
回复潜力（22分）
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?"
评估标准:
- 直接提问：“你怎么看？”、“你会怎么解决这个问题？”
- 有争议的观点：“X比Y更好”
- 邀请发表意见：“同意还是反对？”
- 开放式提示
- 有争议但有思考的陈述
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“刚发布了一个新功能。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“刚发布了一个新功能。有什么想法？”
- ✅ 最佳：“功能应该快速发布但带bug，还是慢发布但稳定？我们选择了速度——这是正确的决定吗？”
Retweet Potential (16 points)
转发潜力（16分）
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"
评估标准:
- 可落地的见解：“以下是如何……”
- 令人惊讶的事实：“X%的开发者不知道……”
- 编号列表：“3种方法……”、“10条经验……”
- 数据驱动的内容
- 适合分享的要点
- 普遍真理
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“我今天学到了一些东西。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“我学到了React hooks可以减少30%的包体积。”
- ✅ 最佳：“🧵 3种React模式帮我减少了30%的包体积：\n\n1. 懒加载hooks\n2. 按路由拆分代码\n3. 摇树优化未使用的导出”
Favorite Potential (12 points)
点赞潜力（12分）
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 😅"
评估标准:
- 情感共鸣：喜悦、沮丧、胜利
- 个人故事：“当我……的时候”
- 共鸣时刻：“我们都经历过……”
- 励志内容
- 脆弱与真实
- 值得保存的实用参考
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“调试很难。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“花了3小时调试一个拼写错误。”
- ✅ 最佳：“花了3小时调试生产环境问题。修复方案？我在凌晨2点‘快速清理’时漏掉的一个分号。再也不在午夜碰正常运行的代码了 😅”
Quote Potential (10 points)
引用潜力（10分）
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."
评估标准:
- 强烈观点：“X已死”、“Y被高估了”
- 挑战传统认知
- 引发评论和反驳
- 对争议话题明确表态
- 发人深省的视角
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“TypeScript很有用。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“TypeScript可以防止bug。”
- ✅ 最佳：“TypeScript最大的价值不是发现bug——而是文档。类型错误只是附加福利。来辩。”
Tier 2: Extended Engagement
第二层级：扩展互动
Dwell Time (6 points)
停留时长（6分）
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
评估标准:
- 需要阅读时间的长文内容
- 带示例的详细解释
- 技术深度
- 多段落结构
- 教育性内容
优化策略:
- 添加具体示例：“例如，在构建X时……”
- 包含数字和数据：“这将延迟从200ms降低到50ms”
- 用清晰的章节结构化内容
Continuous Dwell Time (4 points)
持续停留时长（4分）
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..."
评估标准:
- 线程标识：“🧵”、“Thread:”、“1/”、编号系列
- 叙事结构：开头、中间、结尾
- 需要重读的复杂度
- 分层的教育深度
- 逐步展开的故事线
- “然后……”结构
与停留时长的区别:
- 停留时长: 初始阅读时长（读一遍的时间）
- 持续停留时长: 持续关注度（重读、思考、多部分内容消费）
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“以下是我如何构建X的。[长篇解释]”
- ⚠️ 较好：“🧵 我如何在30天内构建X”
- ✅ 最佳：“🧵 我如何在30天内从想法到月收入1万美元（1/8）\n\n第1-7天：验证\n第8-14天：MVP\n第15-30天：发布\n\n这里有没人告诉你的事……”
Click Potential (5 points)
点击潜力（5分）
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]"
评估标准:
- 链接存在与否及上下文质量
- 行动号召强度：“阅读更多”、“发现”、“学习方法”
- 预览/预告效果
- 好奇心缺口：“结果令人震惊……”
- 清晰的价值主张
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“https://example.com/article”
- ⚠️ 较好：“点击这里阅读更多：[链接]”
- ✅ 最佳：“我如何在3个月内将收入提升10倍（带截图的完整分析）：[链接]”
Photo Expand Potential (4 points)
图片展开潜力（4分）
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]"
评估标准:
- 图片标识：[photo]、[image]、“pic.twitter.com”
- 视觉语言：“看”、“查看”、“瞧这个”
- 暗示视觉内容的emoji：📸、🎨、👀、📷、🖼️
- 前后对比
- 多图叙事：“滑动查看……”
- 视觉证据：“这是证明 👇”
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“我的仪表盘现在看起来很棒。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“看看我的新仪表盘设计。”
- ✅ 最佳：“我的分析仪表盘重新设计前后对比 👇\n\n在2天内从杂乱无章变为清晰洞察。\n\n[视觉标识表明存在图片]”
Video View Potential (3 points)
视频观看潜力（3分）
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"
评估标准:
- 视频标识：[video]、“▶️”、“观看”、“教程”、“演示”
- 时长提示：“2分钟”、“快速演示”、“完整教程”
- 描述观众将看到的内容预览
- 时间戳亮点：“跳到1:30看……”
- 钩子/预告：“看到最后……”
VQV资格（条件性）:
仅当视频时长>5秒（长视频）时可获得满分（3分）。可从以下表述推断：“完整教程”、“深入讲解” vs “快速片段”、“节选”
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“我做了一个视频。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“观看我的新教程 ▶️”
- ✅ 最佳：“完整8分钟拆解：如何用Next.js构建这个UI ▶️\n\n0:00 搭建\n2:15 组件\n5:30 动画\n\n最精彩的部分在6:45”
Quoted Click Potential (3 points)
引用点击潜力（3分）
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."
评估标准:
- 有争议但不完整的陈述
- 需要验证的统计数据或观点
- 引发来源调查的热门观点：“80%的创业公司失败是因为……”
- “等等，什么？”的好奇心因素
- 对来源可信度的质疑
- 大胆观点：“这改变了一切”
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“读这篇关于开发者生产力的有趣研究。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“新研究显示远程开发者生产力提高20%。”
- ✅ 最佳：“斯坦福新研究：远程开发者写的代码多35%，但bug少50%。\n\n这打破了‘办公室协作’的神话。”
Tier 3: Relationship Building
第三层级：关系构建
Profile Click (5 points)
主页点击潜力（5分）
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:"
评估标准:
- 引发对作者的好奇心：“这个人是谁？”
- 展示专业能力：“我在Y公司构建了X”
- 展示独特视角或背景
- 可信度信号：资质、经验
- 引人关注的个人简介内容
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“我认为React很好。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“使用React5年后，我认为它很好。”
- ✅ 最佳：“在为Airbnb、Netflix和50多家创业公司设计React应用后，我希望第一天就知道这些：”
Follow Potential (4 points)
关注潜力（4分）
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."
评估标准:
- 展示持续价值：“我每周发布关于……的教程”
- 展示一致的专业能力
- 承诺未来内容：“明天将分享更多相关内容”
- 建立内容发布节奏
- 创造对内容质量的期待
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“这里有一个React技巧。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“这里有一个React技巧。我每天都发布这类内容。”
- ✅ 最佳：“React技巧#47：[见解]\n\n我每周一拆解高级React模式。跟上节奏了吗？明天的内容是关于suspense边界的。”
Share Potential (2 points)
分享潜力（2分）
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
评估标准:
- 适合更广泛受众的通用分享价值
- 普遍相关性
- 跨社区的广泛吸引力
优化策略:
- 让内容具有普遍相关性，而非小众特定
- 聚焦所有人都面临的共同问题
Share via DM (2 points)
私信分享潜力（2分）
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 😂"
评估标准:
- 个人相关性：“标记某个……的人”、“发给……”
- 圈内笑话或共同经历
- 适合一对一分享的情感共鸣：“这太像你了 😂”
- 共鸣场景：“我们都有这样的朋友……”
- “你一定要看这个”的特质
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“调试很令人沮丧。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“调试生产环境问题压力很大。”
- ✅ 最佳：“标记你的那个在周五下午5点‘快速修复’生产环境然后搞砸一切的开发者朋友 😂”
Share via Copy Link (2 points)
链接分享潜力（2分）
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."
评估标准:
- 参考价值：指南、列表、框架、速查表
- 常青属性（非时效性）
- 专业分享场景（Slack、邮件、书签）
- “保存这个”或“收藏”的表述
- 教育/教程内容
- 值得加入资源库
优化策略:
- ❌ 不佳：“这里有一些我常用的Git命令。”
- ⚠️ 较好：“日常工作实用Git命令。”
- ✅ 最佳：“📌 收藏这个：今年帮我省了100多小时的15个Git命令\n\n[结构清晰的带示例列表]\n\n打印出来放在显示器旁边。”
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.
算法会应用归一化来平衡正负信号：
最终分数 = 基础分数（0-100） + 扣分项（-75至0）
归一化分数 = max(0, min(100, 最终分数))
扣分上限:
- 总扣分 ≤ -20：全额扣除
- 总扣分 > -20：开始逐步降低扣分权重
- 总扣分 > -75：硬上限为-75，避免过度扣分
这可以防止单个负面信号完全主导分数，同时保留其在算法中的重要性。
Text Analysis Limitations
文本分析局限性
This skill performs heuristic text-based analysis, not ML prediction.
What This Skill Cannot Detect
本工具无法检测的内容
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
缺失的元数据:
- 实际媒体存在（照片、视频）
- 真实视频时长或质量
- 实际点击率
- 真实互动指标
- 作者声誉/粉丝数
- 推文时间戳或走红历史
无法获取的信息:
- Phoenix ML模型预测
- 用户互动历史
- 网络关系图
- 实时互动信号
What This Skill Infers From
本工具的推断依据
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
基于文本的启发式规则:
- 语言模式和结构
- 内容格式（线程、列表等）
- 情感语气和风格
- 视觉标识（emoji、markdown）
- 行动号召强度
- 提问 vs 陈述结构
评分方式:
- 保守原则: 未知元素获得基准分数
- 基于模式: 检测语言线索（如📸代表照片，🧵代表线程）
- 聚焦优化: 最适合用于发布前的内容改进
Pre-publishing optimization to maximize engagement potential, not post-hoc analytics or prediction of actual engagement numbers.
用于发布前的优化以最大化互动潜力，而非发布后的分析或实际互动数据的预测。
Detect input language. Respond in same language. Keep optimized version in original language.
检测输入语言，使用相同语言回复。优化后的版本保留原语言。
Bilingual Display for Category and Factor Names
分类和指标名称的双语显示
When input is in Japanese:
- Display Category and Factor names as:
- Examples:
- Category:
コアエンゲージメント（Core Engagement）
- Factor:
- 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:
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
当输入为日语时:
- 分类和指标名称显示为：
- 示例:
- 分类:
コアエンゲージメント（Core Engagement）
- 指标:
- 指标:
リツイート潜在力（Retweet Potential）
当输入为英语时:
带emoji的日语翻译参考:
- 💬 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
See references/algorithm-weights.md for complete weight details from X's open-source algorithm (19-element system).
查看 references/algorithm-weights.md 获取X开源算法（19项体系）的完整权重细节。