Content Angle Ranker Agent Skill

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-scout ran — 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 ranking

Auto-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_gaps as angle candidates
• Use top_content for 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 counts
• web_search "[keyword] site:tiktok.com" OR web_search "[keyword] tiktok viral" → top TikTok content
• web_search "[keyword] site:reddit.com top" → top Reddit discussions
• web_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 | LinkedIn | X | Reddit | 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 score

Dimension 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 6

Dimension 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: string

Output 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 comparison

Error 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-scout first 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_output with 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_params missing required fields for the suggested next skill

Report issues: GitHub Issues | Discussions

References

• shared/references/social-data-providers.md — API configuration and engagement score formula
• shared/references/flywheel-connections.md — master flywheel connection map
• shared/references/platform-rules.md — platform-specific content guidelines
• shared/references/feedback-protocol.md — issue detection and reporting standard

Flywheel Connections

Feeds Into

• viral-post-writer (S2) — recommended_angle with format, hook, and parameters
• tiktok-script-writer (S2) — TikTok-specific angle with duration and hook
• twitter-thread-writer (S2) — X-specific angle with hook
• reddit-post-writer (S2) — Reddit-specific angle with subreddit suggestion
• affiliate-blog-builder (S3) — blog angle with SEO keyword alignment
• comparison-post-writer (S3) — if winning angle is a comparison
• content-pillar-atomizer (S2) — angle as the pillar topic to atomize

Fed By

• trending-content-scout (S1) — engagement data, patterns, gaps, benchmarks
• niche-opportunity-finder (S1) — niche context for angle generation
• competitor-spy (S1) — competitor gaps to exploit
• performance-report (S6) — historical angle performance data

Feedback Loop

• S6 performance-report shows 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"