content-angle-ranker
Skill757 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Rank content angles by engagement data, competition level, and platform fit. Data-driven angle selection instead of guesswork. Use this skill when the user has a keyword or product and needs to decide WHAT to create, which angle to take, which format to use, or which platform to target. Triggers on: "what angle should I use", "rank content ideas for [keyword]", "best angle for [product]", "which content idea will perform best", "help me pick an angle", "what should I write about", "content angle for [topic]", "rank my content ideas", "which approach will get the most views", "data-driven content planning", "angle ranker", "content scoring", "which hook should I use", "compare these content ideas", "prioritize my content angles", "what video should I make".
In this repository55 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- affiliate-checkSkill
- ab-test-generatorSkill
- conversion-trackerSkill
- internal-linking-optimizerSkill
- performance-reportSkill
- seo-auditSkill
- content-repurposerSkill
- email-automation-builderSkill
- multi-program-managerSkill
- paid-ad-copy-writerSkill
- proprietary-data-generatorSkill
- affiliate-blog-builderSkill
- comparison-post-writerSkill
- content-decay-detectorSkill
- content-moat-calculatorSkill
- how-to-tutorial-writerSkill
- keyword-cluster-architectSkill
- listicle-generatorSkill
- content-pillar-atomizerSkill
- content-research-briefSkill
- infographic-generatorSkill
- reddit-post-writerSkill
- tiktok-script-writerSkill
- twitter-thread-writerSkill
- viral-post-writerSkill
- bio-link-deployerSkill
- email-drip-sequenceSkill
- github-pages-deployerSkill
- social-media-schedulerSkill
- bonus-stack-builderSkill
- grand-slam-offerSkill
- guarantee-generatorSkill
- landing-page-creatorSkill
- product-showcase-pageSkill
- squeeze-page-builderSkill
- value-ladder-architectSkill
- webinar-registration-pageSkill
- category-designerSkill
- compliance-checkerSkill
- create-skillSkill
- funnel-plannerSkill
- self-improverSkill
- skill-finderSkill
- affiliate-program-searchSkill
- commission-calculatorSkill
- competitor-spySkill
- find-and-verify-affiliate-programSkill
- monopoly-niche-finderSkill
- niche-opportunity-finderSkill
- purple-cow-auditSkill
- submit-programSkill
- traffic-analyzerSkill
- trending-content-scoutSkill
- your-skill-nameSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
15 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈8
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
7
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 43
After trending-content-scout ran — use its data to pick the best angle
- Distinctive: line 47
Before running any S2 content skill (viral-post-writer, tiktok-script-writer, etc.)
- Very specific: line 68
Auto-detection: If trending-content-scout ran earlier in the conversation, its output is automatically used as the data foundation.
- Very specific: line 76
Use pattern_analysis (winning formats, hooks, engagement benchmarks)
- Very specific: line 77
Use content_gaps as angle candidates
- Very specific: line 78
Use top_content for competition assessment
- Distinctive: line 82
Run a quick scout internally:
- Distinctive: line 111
If all content is positive → honest cons angle
- Distinctive: line 112
If all content targets beginners → advanced user angle
- Distinctive: line 113
If all content is listicles → deep single-product dive
- Very specific: line 230
If time_budget is provided, flag angles that exceed the budget.
- Distinctive: line 234
Before presenting output, verify:
- Distinctive: line 243
If any check fails, fix the output before delivering.
- Distinctive: line 365
No scout data and no keyword: Ask user: "What topic or product are you creating content for?
- Very specific: line 404
When this skill produces unexpected, incomplete, or incorrect output, generate a skill_feedback block (see …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Content Angle Ranker
You have a keyword. You know the niche. But what specific content should you create? Which angle, format, and hook will actually perform? This skill answers that question with data — not gut feeling.
It takes engagement data (from trending-content-scout or live research) and ranks
8-12 content angle candidates by a weighted score combining platform fit, competition
level, engagement prediction, and creator fit. The output is a prioritized list with
a clear recommendation and direct handoff to content creation skills.
Think of it as /plan-ceo-review from gstack, but for content strategy: "What is
the 10-star version of this content?" — except the answer is backed by engagement data.
Stage
This skill belongs to Stage S1: Research — but it bridges directly into S2: Content Creation.
When to Use
- After
trending-content-scoutran — use its data to pick the best angle - User has a product/keyword but doesn't know what content to create
- User has multiple content ideas and wants to prioritize by data
- User wants to know: "If I only have time for ONE piece of content, what should it be?"
- Before running any S2 content skill (viral-post-writer, tiktok-script-writer, etc.)
Input Schema
keyword: string # (required if no scout_data) "AI video tools"
product: object # (optional) Affiliate product being promoted
name: string # "HeyGen"
description: string # What it does
url: string # Product URL or affiliate link
reward_value: string # Commission info — never shown in content
platform: string # (required) Target platform for content creation
# "youtube" | "tiktok" | "linkedin" | "x" | "reddit" | "blog"
creator_strengths: string[] # (optional) What the user is good at
# "storytelling" | "technical" | "humor" | "authority" |
# "visual" | "data" | "personal_experience"
audience: string # (optional) Target audience — "beginners", "developers", "small business owners"
time_budget: string # (optional) "30min" | "2hours" | "1day" — affects difficulty filter
custom_angles: string[] # (optional) User's own angle ideas to include in rankingAuto-detection: If trending-content-scout ran earlier in the conversation,
its output is automatically used as the data foundation. No need to pass it explicitly.
Workflow
Step 1: Gather Engagement Data
If trending-content-scout output exists in context:
- Use
pattern_analysis(winning formats, hooks, engagement benchmarks) - Use
content_gapsas angle candidates - Use
top_contentfor competition assessment - Skip to Step 2
If no scout data: Run a quick scout internally:
web_search "[keyword] site:youtube.com"→ top 10 videos, note formats and view countsweb_search "[keyword] site:tiktok.com"ORweb_search "[keyword] tiktok viral"→ top TikTok contentweb_search "[keyword] site:reddit.com top"→ top Reddit discussionsweb_search "[keyword] [platform] best performing"→ meta-analysis of what works- Extract: dominant formats, popular hooks, view count ranges, gaps
This takes 30-60 seconds and provides enough signal for angle scoring.
Step 2: Generate Angle Candidates (8-12)
Generate 8-12 specific content angle candidates. Each angle must be concrete enough to become a title — not vague ("write about HeyGen") but specific ("HeyGen vs Synthesia: I tested both for 30 days — honest comparison for solo creators").
Sources for angles:
- Gap-based angles (from scout data or web_search):
- Content gaps: topics nobody has covered well
- Format gaps: popular topic but missing in a specific format (e.g., comparison exists on YouTube but not TikTok)
- Audience gaps: existing content targets general audience, specific audience underserved
- Recency gaps: existing content is outdated, fresh version needed
- Pattern-based angles (from winning formats):
- Take the winning format and apply it to the keyword
- Combine the best hook type with the topic
- Replicate the structure of the highest-engagement content with a fresh perspective
- Contrarian angles:
- If all content is positive → honest cons angle
- If all content targets beginners → advanced user angle
- If all content is listicles → deep single-product dive
- User-provided angles (from custom_angles):
- Include any angles the user suggested
- Score them alongside generated candidates — no bias
For each angle, define:
Angle:
title: string # Specific, could be an actual content title
angle: string # Brief description of the angle
format: string # "comparison" | "review" | "tutorial" | "listicle" | "demo" | "story" | "reaction" | "explainer"
hook: string # The actual hook/opening line
hook_type: string # "question" | "shock" | "bold_claim" | "demo_first" | "relatable" | "contrarian"
source: string # "gap" | "pattern" | "contrarian" | "user_provided"Step 3: Score Each Angle
Score every angle on 4 dimensions (1-10 each), then calculate a weighted total:
angle_score = (platform_fit × 0.25) + (competition_level × 0.30) +
(engagement_prediction × 0.30) + (creator_fit × 0.15)Dimension 1: Platform Fit (weight: 25%)
How well does this format/hook work on the target platform?
| Format | YouTube | TikTok | X | Blog | ||
| comparison | 9 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 9 |
| review | 8 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 9 | 9 |
| tutorial | 9 | 7 | 6 | 3 | 7 | 10 |
| listicle | 7 | 8 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 8 |
| demo | 8 | 10 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 |
| story | 6 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 7 | 7 |
| reaction | 7 | 10 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 3 |
| explainer | 8 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 9 |
Adjust based on actual scout data if available (if comparisons outperform on a platform where they usually don't, use the real data instead of the default table).
Dimension 2: Competition Level (weight: 30%)
How many similar content pieces already exist? Higher score = LESS competition.
IF scout data available:
Count how many top_content pieces match this angle's format + similar topic
10 = zero similar content found (blue ocean)
7-9 = 1-3 similar pieces (low competition)
4-6 = 4-10 similar pieces (moderate competition)
1-3 = 10+ similar pieces (saturated)
IF no scout data:
web_search for the exact angle title → count results
Fewer results with exact match = higher scoreDimension 3: Engagement Prediction (weight: 30%)
How likely is this angle to get high engagement based on data?
IF scout data available:
Look at engagement scores of similar formats and hooks in top_content
If this angle's format has avg_engagement > median → higher score
If this angle's hook_type has avg_engagement > median → higher score
Combine: angle uses top format + top hook → 9-10
Angle uses average format + average hook → 5-6
Angle uses underperforming format → 3-4
IF no scout data:
Use platform defaults and general engagement patterns
Comparisons generally outperform reviews → 8 vs 6
Bold claim hooks generally outperform questions → 8 vs 6Dimension 4: Creator Fit (weight: 15%)
How well does this angle match the creator's strengths?
IF creator_strengths provided:
"storytelling" → story format, relatable hooks → high fit
"technical" → tutorial format, demo hooks → high fit
"humor" → reaction format, relatable hooks → high fit
"authority" → review format, bold claim hooks → high fit
"visual" → demo format, demo_first hooks → high fit
"data" → comparison format, explainer → high fit
"personal_experience" → story format, reaction → high fit
Match count: 2+ matches → 9-10, 1 match → 6-7, 0 matches → 4-5
IF no creator_strengths:
Default all angles to 7 (neutral)Step 4: Rank and Add Difficulty/Time Estimates
Sort angles by angle_score descending.
For each angle, estimate:
difficulty: string # "easy" | "medium" | "hard"
estimated_time: string # "30 min" | "1-2 hours" | "half day" | "full day"Difficulty mapping:
- easy: Listicle, simple reaction, short demo, Twitter thread → 30-60 min
- medium: Comparison (need 2 products), tutorial with steps, story post → 1-3 hours
- hard: Deep review with testing, data-driven explainer, long-form video → 3+ hours
If time_budget is provided, flag angles that exceed the budget.
Step 5: Self-Validation
Before presenting output, verify:
- At least 8 angles generated with concrete titles (not vague descriptions)
- Scores are differentiated (not all 7.0-7.5 — spread them out)
- Top angle is clearly justified by data, not arbitrary
- At least 2 gap-based angles included (differentiation opportunities)
- Difficulty estimates are realistic
- Next steps reference specific downstream skills with parameters
If any check fails, fix the output before delivering. Do not flag the checklist to the user.
Output Schema
output_schema_version: "1.0.0"
keyword: string
platform: string
data_source: string # "trending-content-scout output" | "quick web_search scan"
angles_generated: number # 8-12
top_angle:
title: string
angle: string
format: string
hook: string
hook_type: string
score: number
why: string # data-backed reasoning
difficulty: string
estimated_time: string
all_angles:
- title: string
angle: string
format: string
hook: string
hook_type: string
platform_fit: number
competition_level: number
engagement_prediction: number
creator_fit: number
score: number
difficulty: string
estimated_time: string
source: string # "gap" | "pattern" | "contrarian" | "user_provided"
recommended_next_skill: string # "viral-post-writer" | "tiktok-script-writer" | etc.
recommended_skill_params: # ready-to-use parameters for the next skill
format: string
hook_style: string
angle: stringOutput Format
## Content Angle Ranker: [Keyword] on [Platform]
### Data Foundation
📊 Based on: [trending-content-scout output (20 pieces analyzed) | quick web_search scan]
---
### 🥇 #1 Recommended Angle — Score: [X.X]/10
**"[Specific Title]"**
| Dimension | Score | Evidence |
|-----------|-------|----------|
| Platform Fit | X/10 | [Format] works well on [Platform] — [data point] |
| Competition | X/10 | [Number] similar pieces exist — [assessment] |
| Engagement Prediction | X/10 | [Format] + [hook] averages [X] engagement in this niche |
| Creator Fit | X/10 | Matches your strengths in [X] |
| **Total** | **X.X/10** | |
- **Format:** [comparison] | **Hook:** [bold_claim]
- **Opening line:** "[Actual hook sentence]"
- **Difficulty:** [medium] | **Time:** [1-2 hours]
- **Why this wins:** [2-3 sentences of data-backed reasoning]
---
### 🥈 #2 — "[Title]" — Score: [X.X]/10
- Format: [X] | Hook: [X] | Competition: [X/10] | Time: [X]
- **Why:** [1 sentence]
### 🥉 #3 — "[Title]" — Score: [X.X]/10
- Format: [X] | Hook: [X] | Competition: [X/10] | Time: [X]
- **Why:** [1 sentence]
---
### All Angles Ranked
| # | Title | Format | Hook | Plat. Fit | Comp. | Eng. Pred. | Creator | Score | Time |
|---|-------|--------|------|-----------|-------|------------|---------|-------|------|
| 1 | ... | comparison | bold_claim | 9 | 8 | 9 | 8 | 8.7 | 2h |
| 2 | ... | demo | demo_first | 10 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 8.0 | 1h |
| 3 | ... | story | relatable | 9 | 6 | 7 | 9 | 7.5 | 1h |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
---
### ⚡ Quick Win vs Best Bet
| Strategy | Angle | Score | Time | Best For |
|----------|-------|-------|------|----------|
| **Quick Win** | [Easiest high-scoring angle] | X.X | 30min | "I want to ship something today" |
| **Best Bet** | [Highest scoring angle] | X.X | 2h | "I want the best possible content" |
| **Contrarian** | [Highest-scoring contrarian] | X.X | Xh | "I want to stand out from everyone" |
---
### 🚀 Next Steps
**To create Angle #1:**Skill: [viral-post-writer | tiktok-script-writer | affiliate-blog-builder] Parameters: product: [product name] format: [comparison] hook_style: [bold_claim] angle: "[specific angle description]" platform: [platform]
**Alternative paths:**
- `tiktok-script-writer` — for short-form video version of Angle #1
- `content-pillar-atomizer` — create a blog post, then atomize across all platforms
- `comparison-post-writer` — if the winning angle is a comparisonError Handling
- No scout data and no keyword: Ask user: "What topic or product are you creating content for? And which platform?"
- Only 1 platform specified + limited data: Generate angles anyway using platform-specific defaults. Note: "Limited data available. Scores are based on general platform patterns. Run
trending-content-scoutfirst for data-backed scoring." - All angles score similarly (within 0.5 points): Spread them out by double-weighting the most differentiating dimension. Present as: "These angles are closely matched. The tiebreaker is [competition/creator fit/etc.]."
- User's custom angles score low: Still include them but be honest: "Your angle '[X]' scored [X.X/10] — competition is high and the format doesn't match platform trends. Consider the #1 angle instead, or combine your angle with a [winning format]."
- Time budget too short for any good angle: Recommend the easiest angle regardless of score, and flag: "With [30 min], your best option is [quick angle]. For higher impact, allocate [2 hours] for [best angle]."
Examples
Example 1:
User: "I want to promote HeyGen on TikTok. What angle should I use?"
→ keyword: "HeyGen", platform: "tiktok"
→ Quick scout: web_search "HeyGen tiktok" → mostly demo-first content, 30-45s
→ Generate 10 angles: "HeyGen vs Synthesia comparison", "I made a $2000 video for free with HeyGen",
"POV: your boss asks for a video and you use AI", "HeyGen for real estate agents", etc.
→ Top angle: "I replaced a $2000 video production with HeyGen" — Score: 8.7
(bold_claim hook, demo format, low competition on TikTok, high engagement predicted)
→ Next: tiktok-script-writer with hook_style: bold_claim, duration: 45s
Example 2: User: "Rank these content ideas for my YouTube channel about email marketing:
- ConvertKit vs Mailchimp comparison
- How I grew my list to 10K subscribers
- Top 5 email marketing mistakes" → platform: "youtube", custom_angles provided → Scout YouTube for email marketing content → Score all 3 + generate 5 additional angles → Result: "How I grew to 10K" scores highest (story format + bold_claim = 8.5) because competition for comparisons is saturated (score: 6.2) and listicles are average (7.1) → The user's story angle wins — with a suggested hook: "I went from 0 to 10K subscribers in 6 months. Here's what nobody tells you."
Example 3: User: "I'm good at storytelling and humor. What should I create about AI writing tools on LinkedIn?" → creator_strengths: ["storytelling", "humor"], platform: "linkedin" → Generate angles weighted toward story format → Top: "I let AI write my LinkedIn posts for a week. My boss noticed." — Score: 9.1 (story format, relatable hook, low competition on LinkedIn for this angle, perfect creator fit)
Feedback & Issue Reporting
When this skill produces unexpected, incomplete, or incorrect output, generate a
skill_feedback block (see shared/references/feedback-protocol.md for full schema).
Skill-specific failure modes:
- All angles score within 0.5 points: Scoring not differentiated enough. Report as
wrong_outputwith the scores. - Top angle is generic: "Write a review of X" instead of a specific, titled angle. Report as
data_quality. - Downstream skill can't use recommended_skill_params: Schema mismatch. Report as
chain_break.
Auto-detect triggers:
- Score range (max - min) < 1.0 across all angles
- <8 angles generated
recommended_skill_paramsmissing required fields for the suggested next skill
Report issues: GitHub Issues | Discussions
References
shared/references/social-data-providers.md— API configuration and engagement score formulashared/references/flywheel-connections.md— master flywheel connection mapshared/references/platform-rules.md— platform-specific content guidelinesshared/references/feedback-protocol.md— issue detection and reporting standard
Flywheel Connections
Feeds Into
viral-post-writer(S2) — recommended_angle with format, hook, and parameterstiktok-script-writer(S2) — TikTok-specific angle with duration and hooktwitter-thread-writer(S2) — X-specific angle with hookreddit-post-writer(S2) — Reddit-specific angle with subreddit suggestionaffiliate-blog-builder(S3) — blog angle with SEO keyword alignmentcomparison-post-writer(S3) — if winning angle is a comparisoncontent-pillar-atomizer(S2) — angle as the pillar topic to atomize
Fed By
trending-content-scout(S1) — engagement data, patterns, gaps, benchmarksniche-opportunity-finder(S1) — niche context for angle generationcompetitor-spy(S1) — competitor gaps to exploitperformance-report(S6) — historical angle performance data
Feedback Loop
- S6
performance-reportshows which angles actually performed → update scoring weights and format preferences for next run → content strategy improves with every cycle
chain_metadata:
skill_slug: "content-angle-ranker"
stage: "research"
timestamp: string
suggested_next:
- "viral-post-writer"
- "tiktok-script-writer"
- "affiliate-blog-builder"Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

