Ye Tong’s Five-Check Local Content Audit

Entry Conditions

• The user explicitly provides the path to that coach’s own

  person-dna.md

  and either a selected specific topic or at least one existing title, opening, body, or visual plan. If the user only says, “I want to publish fat-loss content,” hand them off to the Topic Idea Skill first. If they request direct writing or a complete rewrite, hand them off to the Copywriting Skill.
• First, run

  python3 scripts/check_profile.py <person-dna.md>

  from this Skill’s directory, or use the script’s actual absolute path; do not treat the user project’s current directory as the Skill directory. A diagnosis based on the coach’s city, audience, experience, services, and voice may proceed only if the profile structure is valid and

  status: active

  . Passing the precheck does not mean that individual facts or publication permissions have been verified, so each item must still be checked separately.
• If the profile path has not been provided, ask only for the path and do not search private directories. If the identity does not match or information from multiple people has been mixed together, confirm the target first. If the profile is not active, stop the personalized audit and display the following message as written:

Persona DNA has not yet been activated. At present, only the generic method can be used; personalized topic ideation, real-experience mapping, and personal expression calibration cannot be enabled. Complete the “Persona Foundation Interview” and confirm the profile before unlocking the full Ye Tong content methodology engine.

schema_version: 2

Diagnostic Sequence

1. Confirm the materials for this review: whether a topic has been selected or a draft already exists; whether its primary type is persona-oriented, marketing-oriented, altruistic, or traffic-and-engagement-oriented; the target local members, service area, content format, available authentic assets, and the feedback the user actually wants. If the title or visuals are missing, mark them as “Not provided”; do not pretend to have reviewed them.
2. From the six groups of Persona DNA, extract only the information needed for this review: business positioning, the primary local audience and their actual goals or barriers, members’ own words and how those concerns are handled, the coach’s identity and advantages, actual classes and supplementary services, standout or authorized cases, and expression samples. Use this evidence to assess whether the draft addresses this audience’s needs, whether its standards and trust-building evidence are appropriate, and whether it sounds like the coach themselves. Do not penalize the draft for not using every piece of profile information. Examples mentioned during an interview do not count as verified facts, and the coach’s own summary of why they chose something does not count as a client testimonial. Check credential names and scope, nutrition-tracking methods and frequency, and permission to publish individual cases separately. Do not assume that daily monitoring or anonymization automatically makes publication acceptable. If a new statement in the current conversation conflicts with the profile, mark it as pending verification rather than overwriting the profile.
3. Follow the Review Rubric to check each of the five areas: local audience resonance, factual accuracy and publication boundaries, immediate recognizability, reader value and personal voice, and production and verification. For topic-only material, assess only what can be observed at the topic level; do not speculate about the performance of a finished post.
4. Every finding must point to specific wording provided by the user, a missing field, or confirmed evidence in the profile. Distinguish “Confirmed Issue,” “Evidence Needed,” and “Personal Preference”; do not present subjective aesthetic judgments as platform rules. Check numerical claims about training, nutrition, body transformation, and service promises for their intended audience, duration, conditions, and supporting evidence. For member assets, also verify publication authorization and the risk of local identification.
5. Begin with the one to three minimal changes most likely to affect local members’ understanding or trust. Clearly false claims, unauthorized disclosures, and guaranteed medical outcomes must be marked as issues that must be resolved before publication. If the user explicitly requests a rewrite, the diagnosis may be handed off to the Copywriting Skill, but this Skill does not automatically rewrite the entire draft or publish it.

Delivery