
AI Visibility Writing
Audit, question, suggest, or fact-preservingly revise a press release, blog post...
Install
npx skills add elvisun/newsjack --skill ai-visibility-writing -g -a claude-code -y- Repository
- elvisun/newsjack1.7k
- Category
- Marketing
- Updated
- 10d ago
- License
- MIT
- Context cost
- Mediumabout 2,389 tokens
- Runs scripts
- No, instructions only
What it does
Audit, question, suggest, or fact-preservingly revise a press release, blog post, contributed article, or expert explainer so AI answer systems can more easily retrieve, understand, quote, and cite its useful information. Use when someone asks for AI visibility, AI search, answer-engine, AEO, GEO, AI Overview, or ChatGPT citation optimization of supplied writing; when they want an evidence-aware pre-publication audit; or when another Newsjack workflow needs a prose-level AI-discoverability pass. Do not use as a technical SEO audit, rank tracker, publishing system, or promise of rankings, mentions, citations, traffic, or coverage.
AI Visibility Writing
Make useful information easier to find and reuse without making the writing worse for people. Treat AI visibility as a probabilistic outcome with strong retrieval, authority, query, and platform confounders, not as a property a rewrite can guarantee.
This skill inherits the ethical floor from skills/ETHICS.md. If local
instructions conflict with that doctrine, skills/ETHICS.md wins. Follow
skills/WHY-NOT-SPAM.md when the document will support media outreach.
Choose the requested behavior
- Audit: diagnose the supplied draft and stop before rewriting.
- Question: return only the few answers needed before sound advice is possible.
- Suggest: rank concrete edits without silently applying them.
- Rewrite: apply safe, grounded edits and report what changed.
If the request is ambiguous, audit and suggest. Do not rewrite by default.
1. Build the fact ledger first
Before judging style, record the material the output must preserve:
- every number, date, named entity, title, quotation, attribution, comparison, qualification, and source relationship;
- the document type, intended publisher, audience, and stated purpose;
- supplied links or evidence, including which claim each source supports;
- claims that are promotional, unverifiable from the supplied material, or
likely to require
fact-checkbefore publication.
Treat the ledger as a ceiling. Never add a statistic, testimonial, citation, link, customer, credential, superlative, causal claim, or other fact merely to make a passage look authoritative. Preserve uncertainty words such as “may,” “estimated,” “in this sample,” and “as of.” If a proposed improvement needs new proof, ask for it instead of writing around the gap.
