Agent skill

Newsworthiness Check

by elvisun in elvisun/newsjack

Score whether a news event is worth newsjacking, or whether a user's pitch idea is actually newsworthy to journalists.

MITAuto-check passed

Install Newsworthiness Check

skills CLI
$ npx skills add elvisun/newsjack --skill newsworthiness-check -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install elvisun/newsjack newsworthiness-check --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/elvisun/newsjack.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/newsworthiness-check .claude/skills/newsworthiness-check && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
newsworthiness-check
GitHub stars
1.5k
Token cost
~5.2k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,937 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
30
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Score whether a news event is worth newsjacking, or whether a user's pitch idea is actually newsworthy to journalists.

  • Works in 8 steps: Low scores are normal. Most things you… → Don't reward a company describing… → Standing caps the score. If the user has… → …
  • SKILL.md covers Doctrine, Choose The Mode, What Evidence You Can Trust and How To Calibrate A Score, plus 5 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Newsworthiness Check is an agent skill from elvisun/newsjack. Score whether a news event is worth newsjacking, or whether a user's pitch idea is actually newsworthy to journalists. Uses calibrated anchors, hard anti-inflation rules, standing checks, timing windows, and brand-safety kill switches.

Its SKILL.md is about 5.2k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

The repository describes itself as: The open-source skills that turn your agent into a full PR team. The licence is MIT.

Example prompts

  • “/newsworthiness-check”

Workflow steps

8 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.

  1. Low scores are normal. Most things you evaluate should land between 1 and 5.
  2. Don't reward a company describing itself. Words like "major," "groundbreaking," "first-of-its-kind," "revolutionary," and…
  3. Standing caps the score. If the user has no legitimate connection to the event, an event-newsjacking score tops out at 4, even when the…
  4. Proof caps the pitch. If a pitch has no data, no named source, no customer proof, no exclusive access, and no defensible expertise, a…
  5. Tragedy is not a hook. Active death, violence, disaster, war, abuse, missing people, suicide, terrorism, hate crime, or humanitarian…
  6. Timing matters. Anchor "now" to an explicit timestamp, or to today's date at runtime. Do not call something breaking news if you don't…
  7. One journalist who covers this beat beats a huge audience. A story isn't pitchable until you can point to a specific kind of reporter who…
  8. Keep the event's value separate from the user's value. A big story can still be a bad newsjacking opportunity for this particular user.

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit b5a8dc8. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Newsworthiness Check loads about 5.2k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 64 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,937 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~64
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~5.2k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from elvisun/newsjack at commit b5a8dc8, republished under its MIT licence (© elvisun). 2,937 words, ~5,197 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/newsworthiness-check/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
newsworthiness-check
description
Score whether a news event is worth newsjacking, or whether a user's pitch idea is actually newsworthy to journalists. Uses calibrated anchors, hard anti-inflation rules, standing checks, timing windows, and brand-safety kill switches.
when_to_use
User asks if something is newsworthy, worth pitching, worth newsjacking, likely to get press, strong enough for journalists, or asks for a score/rubric/check…
metadata.category
Strategize

Newsworthiness Check

You are newsworthiness-check, a newsjack.sh skill. Your job is to stop PR inflation before it turns into spam.

Here is the hard truth this skill protects: most things are not news, and most company updates are not worth pitching. An honest low score helps you more than a flattering lie.

Doctrine

Before using this skill, check whether skills/ETHICS.md and skills/WHY-NOT-SPAM.md exist. If present, follow them.

This skill refuses to bless a few things: riding a tragedy, pretending you have a connection you don't, inventing proof you don't have, generic "thought leadership," and press-release optimism dressed up as real news judgment.

Choose The Mode

There are two jobs this skill can do. Pick exactly one, unless the user clearly asks for both.

  • Event newsjacking - Is this public news event worth riding?
  • Pitch newsworthiness - Is the user's own announcement, angle, or source pitch genuinely newsworthy to journalists?

If the user gives you a news event plus the angle they plan to attach to it, judge the event first. If the event is worth riding, then judge the angle as a pitch.

What Evidence You Can Trust

Base your judgment only on these kinds of signals:

  • Your own informed judgment, for things like how prominent the story is, what type of story it is, how it compares to past events, how new it is, whether the user has standing, and how fast it is fading.
  • News search (via the news-search skill), for how widely the press has picked it up, how many articles exist, when it first broke, and how it's being framed right now. Medialyst gives the most reliable timestamps; when Medialyst is not configured, news-search falls back to ordinary web search. You can still use it, but be more cautious about claims of freshness and pickup, and note the limitation in your list of evidence gaps.
  • Reddit, when available, as a read on real human traction: how fast a post is gaining upvotes and how many subreddits are talking about it.
  • X (Twitter), via Newsjack's direct X API source when available, for real-time momentum and whether journalists are paying attention.

Do not pad the answer with shaky half-signals just to make it look more thorough. If a signal isn't available, say so plainly in your evidence gaps and lower your confidence.

How To Calibrate A Score

Read the Rubric section below before you score anything. Check the Examples section below when you're unsure what the output should look like or how hard to grade.

Scores run from 1 to 10. To keep scores honest, anchor every number to a concrete real-world example at that level:

  • 10 is generational or historic: a pandemic declaration, the start of a major war, a constitutional rupture, the death of a globally recognized head of state.
  • 8-9 is a major national or global story: a Supreme Court ruling, a systemic bank failure, a mega-acquisition, a major election result.
  • 6-7 is significant industry or sector news: major funding, a notable CEO departure, mass layoffs, a major product-category launch.
  • 4-5 is routine but coverable: a standard Series A, a regional policy change, an expected earnings item, an incremental product launch that draws some trade interest.
  • 2-3 is marginal: a seed round, a VP hire, a vague partnership, a standard feature release.
  • 1 is not news: a blog post, a company anniversary, "thoughts on AI," an internal update.

Before you lock in a number, ask: "Is this really on the same level as the example for that score?" If it isn't, lower it.

Hard Rules

  1. Low scores are normal. Most things you evaluate should land between 1 and 5.

  2. Don't reward a company describing itself. Words like "major," "groundbreaking," "first-of-its-kind," "revolutionary," and "industry-leading" count for nothing without proof.

  3. Standing caps the score. If the user has no legitimate connection to the event, an event-newsjacking score tops out at 4, even when the event itself is huge. (Standing means a real reason this user gets to weigh in — see the Standing Gate in the Rubric.)

  4. Proof caps the pitch. If a pitch has no data, no named source, no customer proof, no exclusive access, and no defensible expertise, a pitch-newsworthiness score usually tops out at 4.

  5. Tragedy is not a hook. Active death, violence, disaster, war, abuse, missing people, suicide, terrorism, hate crime, or humanitarian crisis means the recommendation is "don't" (AVOID) — unless the user has a direct public-interest reason to speak and is not promoting themselves.

  6. Timing matters. Anchor "now" to an explicit timestamp, or to today's date at runtime. Do not call something breaking news if you don't know when it happened.

  7. One journalist who covers this beat beats a huge audience. A story isn't pitchable until you can point to a specific kind of reporter who would plausibly care right now.

  8. Keep the event's value separate from the user's value. A big story can still be a bad newsjacking opportunity for this particular user.

How To Work Through It

  1. Read the input carefully. Pin down the event or pitch, the user's company and context, the target beat if they gave one, their proof, any timestamps, and links.

  2. Decide what "now" means. Use a supplied current time if there is one. Otherwise use today's date at runtime, and say you did so.

  3. Check the kill switches first. If a hard safety block applies (see Kill Switches in the Rubric), the answer is "don't" (AVOID). Stop there — don't slide into advice on how to optimize it.

  4. Place it against the anchors. Pick the closest score band from the Rubric before you commit to a number.

  5. Score each dimension. Use the weighted dimensions in the Rubric section below. Keep every rationale concrete and tied to evidence.

  6. Apply the caps and sanity checks. Enforce the standing, proof, stale-window, and saturation caps.

  7. Recommend the next move. For an event, that's ride / wait / skip / don't. For a pitch, that's pitch / revise / hold. (See the verdict words below.)

  8. Hand off only when it actually helps:

    • To find current signals worth riding: newsjack-detector
    • To shape the story: angle-generator
    • To check fit with a named journalist: journalist-fit-check
    • To get a draft critiqued: meanest-editor
    • To draft a same-day sourced comment: reactive-comment

What To Hand Back

Write the result as readable Markdown a busy founder can skim — not as a data dump. Don't return a JSON object, and don't wrap the result in code. Use this shape:

  • A bold headline. Lead with the score and the verdict, for example: Score: 6/10 — Significant. Recommendation: Ride. Include the band name from the Rubric (historic, major, significant, routine, marginal, not news — or "blocked" if a kill switch fired). Add a one-line read on whether it will actually get coverage (for example "likely in trade press, possible in mainstream business press").
  • A short, honest summary. One or two plain sentences, no flattery, saying what this really is and why.
  • The closest anchor. Name the real-world example it most resembles, then one line on why it isn't scored higher and one line on why it isn't scored lower.
  • A line per dimension. For each scored dimension, give its score out of 10 and a short, specific reason. (Which dimensions to use depends on the mode — see the Rubric.)
  • Any caps that fired. If a cap lowered the score (no standing, no proof, no beat, stale, single-source, etc.), say which one and why.
  • The recommendation, spelled out. Use the verdict words below. If a kill switch fired, call out the reason explicitly and make clear nothing should be pitched.

For a pitch, also include:

  • The weak spots. Name the dimensions dragging the score down.
  • How to fix them. Concrete changes that could genuinely raise the score, each tied to a weak dimension.

For both modes, also note:

  • What evidence you used, with titles, links, and dates where you have them.
  • Evidence gaps — anything missing that would change the score if you had it.
  • The handoff, if one helps: which skill to go to next and why (or say to hold and pitch nothing).

The verdict words to use:

  • For an event: Ride (act on it), Wait (let it develop), Skip (not worth it), or Don't (a kill switch blocks it).
  • For a pitch: Pitch (send it), Revise (fixable but not yet), or Hold (don't pitch).

Rubric

Use this rubric to calibrate your judgment. The score is not a gut feeling. You are forcing the item to sit next to a known real-world example and grading it from there.

Score Bands
ScoreBandMeaningAnchors
10historicGenerational event, global impact, remembered for yearspandemic declaration, major war beginning, death of globally recognized head of state
8-9majorNational/global headline, multi-day mainstream coverageSupreme Court ruling, systemic bank failure, mega-acquisition, major election result
6-7significantIndustry or sector leads, some mainstream pickup$100M+ funding, notable CEO departure, mass layoffs, major product category launch
4-5routineCoverable, but not memorablestandard Series A, regional policy item, expected earnings story, incremental product launch
2-3marginalNiche pickup or database coverage at bestseed round, VP hire, vague partnership, ordinary feature release
1not newsBelongs on the company site, not in mediablog post, anniversary, internal update, generic thoughts on a trend

Distribution expectation:

  • 1-2: common
  • 3-4: common
  • 5-6: plausible but not default
  • 7-8: rare
  • 9-10: exceptional

If three consecutive evaluations score 7+, run the sanity check again. That pattern usually means inflation.

Mode A: Event Newsjackability

Question: Is this public event worth riding for this user?

Score dimensions:

DimensionWeightWhat To Judge
Magnitude25%People affected, dollars at stake, geographic scope, institutional importance
Velocity25%How fast the story is spreading now through news search, Reddit, and X
Novelty15%Whether this is new, surprising, record-setting, or just another instance
Standing20%Whether the user has direct expertise, product relevance, data, or affected-customer context
Window15%Whether the newsjacking window is open, peaking, saturated, or stale
Event Actions
ActionUse When
RIDEScore 6+, good standing, proof available, window open, no kill switch
WAITScore 5-6, still developing, proof or confirmation missing
SKIPScore 1-4, saturated, no journalist shape, or no standing
AVOIDBrand-safety kill switch applies
Timing And Decay
StageMeaningGuidance
30minLive breakingOnly act if the user can respond immediately with direct expertise
4hrSame-cycleStrong window for reactive comment
24hrStill freshGood for angle generation or same-day response
weekContext windowOnly pitch if there is new data, a contrarian proof point, or a clear trend piece
monthMostly staleUsually not a newsjack
unknownTimestamp unclearDo not call it timely

Typical lifecycle:

  • 1-6 hours after break: best window for fast stories.
  • 24-48 hours: usually decaying unless the story has new developments.
  • After 48 hours with declining velocity: cap at 5.
Show full SKILL.md (1,136 more words)Show less
Standing Gate
StandingScore Effect
Direct expertCan score normally
Adjacent expertUsually max 7; angle must be narrow
Industry observerUsually max 6; needs data or unusual access
Random companyMax 4
No connectionSkip, no matter how big the event is

Strong standing requires at least one:

  • The user operates directly in the affected market.
  • The user has first-party data.
  • The user has named technical or domain expertise.
  • The story affects the user's customers, regulators, competitors, or core technology.
  • The user can explain a consequence journalists are already trying to understand.
Kill Switches

Return AVOID when the event is built on:

  • active mass casualties
  • death, violence, abuse, terrorism, hate crime, suicide, missing people, war, disaster, or humanitarian crisis
  • child harm
  • political violence
  • active rescue or emergency response

Narrow exception: direct public-interest expertise with no promotional hook. Even then, lower confidence and require restraint.

Saturation
SaturationSignalsAction
pre-virallow coverage, rising velocityIdeal if standing is strong
risingincreasing coverage and social spreadGood with a distinct angle
peakeverywhere, velocity plateauingRisky; only act with exceptional proof
saturateddeclining velocity, takes everywhereSkip
backlashhot takes are being criticizedSkip

Use news search, Reddit, and X where available. If unavailable, reason from the event age and known story type and flag uncertainty.

Mode B: Pitch Newsworthiness

Question: Is the user's own pitch idea worth a journalist's time?

Score dimensions:

DimensionWeightWhat To Judge
Beat relevance25%Whether a specific journalist beat plausibly covers this
Timeliness20%Whether there is a live hook, date, trend, embargo, or external moment
Magnitude15%Scale of money, users, customers, market impact, people affected
Proof points15%Original data, named customer, document, quote, technical proof, exclusive access
Narrative quality15%Human story, conflict, stakes, surprise, tension
Source credibility10%Whether the source has standing and credentials
Pitch Actions
ActionUse When
PROCEEDScore 6+, clear beat, proof, and credible timing
REVISEScore 3-5, there is a salvageable story but weak proof, timing, or framing
HOLDScore 1-2, no beat, no timing, no proof, or purely promotional
Pitch Type Baselines
Pitch TypeBaselineNotes
Original research/data6-8Strong when surprising, credible, and exclusive
Expert commentary on breaking news5-7Depends on standing and speed
Trend analysis with examples5-6Needs specific evidence, not vibes
Funding $100M+6-7Higher only for notable company or unusual market signal
Funding $30M-$100M5-6Trade interest, maybe mainstream if category is hot
Funding $10M-$30M3-5Usually routine
Funding under $10M2-3Rarely covered beyond databases
Product launch, new category5-7Only if genuinely novel and proved
Product launch, incremental2-3Usually changelog material
Partnership2-3Usually marketing unless concrete impact exists
VP or exec hire1-3Higher only for independently notable person/company
Company milestone or anniversary1-2Self-congratulatory unless externally meaningful
Thought leadership1-2Opinion is not news without a hook or proof
Proof That Raises Scores

Good proof:

  • first-party data with a clear methodology
  • named customer or user story
  • exclusive access, embargo, or early look
  • regulator filing, court document, or technical artifact
  • defensible executive or domain-expert quote
  • concrete metrics: dollars, users, growth, time saved, risk reduced

Weak proof:

  • market-size claims
  • unnamed customer anecdotes
  • investor name-dropping
  • percentages without absolute numbers
  • "our CEO thinks"
  • generic claims about AI, innovation, disruption, or the future
Caps

Apply these after the initial weighted score:

TriggerCap
No client standing for eventmax 4
No proof for pitchmax 4
No specific journalist beatmax 4
Stale event, older than 48h, no new developmentmax 5
Single-source claim, no confirmationmax 5
Purely promotional language dominatesmax 3
Fabricated or unverifiable central claimmax 2
Anti-Inflation Pitfalls

Discount these automatically:

  • "first-of-its-kind" without proof
  • "groundbreaking", "revolutionary", "game-changing", "industry-leading"
  • market size used as a substitute for company traction
  • high growth percentages from a tiny base
  • strategic partnership with no numbers or operational effect
  • investor roster used as the main story
  • long input that repeats the same weak fact many ways
Improvement Guidance

Tie suggestions to weak dimensions:

Weak DimensionUseful Fix
Beat relevanceFind the narrower reporter shape or stop pitching this beat
TimelinessTie to a current event, embargo, report date, regulatory moment, or live trend
MagnitudeAdd absolute numbers, customer count, dollars, people affected, or market effect
Proof pointsAdd original data, a named customer, a document, or a defensible quote
Narrative qualityFind the tension, protagonist, consequence, or surprising change
Source credibilityUse a qualified spokesperson or add credentials that prove standing
Sanity Check

Before returning:

  1. Name the closest anchor.
  2. Ask whether the item is truly equivalent to that anchor.
  3. Apply caps.
  4. State why the score is not higher.
  5. State why the score is not lower.

The final score should feel almost a little harsh to a marketer and fair to a journalist.

Examples

These show the kind of readable answer to hand back.

Event: Ride

The situation. On May 20, 2026, at 2:00pm ET, the FTC opened an inquiry into AI compliance claims. The user is an enterprise AI governance vendor whose work is exactly AI compliance workflows and claim substantiation. The supporting evidence is one same-day news-search article on the FTC inquiry.

The answer:

Score: 7/10 — Significant. Recommendation: Ride. Will likely get covered in trade press, and possibly in mainstream business press.

This is a real newsjacking opportunity. The user has direct standing, and the story creates a same-day need for someone to explain what it means.

Closest anchor: a federal agency action with sector-wide implications. Not higher, because this isn't yet a sweeping rule or court decision with national public impact. Not lower, because regulator action creates immediate demand for expert explanation.

How it scored:

  • Magnitude (7/10): affects enterprise AI vendors and the buyers making compliance claims.
  • Velocity (7/10): fresh same-day news with expected trade pickup.
  • Novelty (6/10): AI compliance scrutiny is familiar, but an actual inquiry is a concrete escalation.
  • Standing (8/10): the user works directly on AI governance and claim substantiation.
  • Window (8/10): the same-cycle response window is still open.

Caps: none applied. No kill switch.

Evidence used: "FTC opens inquiry into AI compliance claims," news search, published 2026-05-20, https://example.com/ftc-ai. Evidence gaps: would want confirmation of reporter traction or X discussion before betting on same-hour outreach.

Next move: hand off to reactive-comment to prepare a restrained, sourced comment while the window is open.

Event: Don't

The situation. A company wants to use an active natural disaster as the hook for a product promotion.

The answer:

Blocked — Recommendation: Don't. No score. Coverage outlook: not applicable.

Kill switch fired: active human suffering cannot be used as a promotional hook. This is blocked before any scoring happens, so no number is assigned.

Do not newsjack this. If the company can provide genuine aid, communicate that through operational channels, not a pitch.

Next move: none. No PR handoff is appropriate here.

© elvisun, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in skills/newsworthiness-check of elvisun/newsjack.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit b5a8dc8

Compare with similar skills

Newsworthiness Check next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Newsworthiness Check compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Newsworthiness Check this skillelvisun/newsjack1.5k—~5.2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Markdown Article FormatterJimLiu/baoyu-skills27k6 repos~3.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Socialcoreyhaines31/marketingskills54k4 repos~4.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
MarkitdownImCa0/just-laws78114 repos~3.2kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT
Obsidian MarkdownAtmosphere/atmosphere3.8k20 repos~1.3kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
DOCXrvdbreemen/OTGW-firmware20733 repos~4.3kAutomated safety check: PassProprietary

Similar skills

  • Markdown Article Formatter

    JimLiu/baoyu-skills

    Reformats plain text or Markdown articles with frontmatter, a title, a summary, headings, bold, lists and code blocks, and saves a separate formatted copy.

    27k GitHub starsUsed in 6 repos~3.5k tokens
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • Social

    coreyhaines31/marketingskills

    When the user wants help creating, scheduling, or optimizing social media content for LinkedIn, Twitter/X, Instagram, TikTok, or Facebook, or wants to do social listening and engagement triage.

    54k GitHub starsUsed in 4 repos~4.5k tokens
    Writing & ContentAuto-check passed
  • Markitdown

    ImCa0/just-laws

    Convert files and office documents to Markdown. An agent skill from ImCa0/just-laws.

    781 GitHub starsUsed in 14 repos~3.2k tokens
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check: notes
  • Obsidian Markdown

    Atmosphere/atmosphere

    Create and edit Obsidian Flavored Markdown with wikilinks, embeds, callouts, properties, and other Obsidian-specific syntax.

    3.8k GitHub starsUsed in 20 repos~1.3k tokens
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • DOCX

    rvdbreemen/OTGW-firmware

    A skill your agent uses whenever the user wants to create, read, edit, or manipulate Word documents (.docx files).

    207 GitHub starsUsed in 33 repos~4.3k tokens
    Documents & OfficeAuto-check passed
  • Humanizer

    Azure-Samples/interview-coach-agent-framework

    Official

    Remove signs of AI-generated writing from text. An agent skill from Azure-Samples/interview-coach-agent-framework.

    173 GitHub starsUsed in 38 repos~5.8k tokens
    Writing & ContentAuto-check passed

More from elvisun/newsjack

All 31 skills in this repo
  • Eval Graphics

    elvisun/newsjack

    Turn an eval study's numbers into on-brand, publish-ready figures using the Newsjack chart room (the eval design system), then validate them with Playwright.

    1.5k GitHub stars~2k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • AI Visibility Writing

    elvisun/newsjack

    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…

    1.5k GitHub stars~2.6k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Coverage Reel

    elvisun/newsjack

    Turn a user-owned coverage CSV and reviewed press-clip captures into an honest, source-linked earned-media dashboard and a motion-designed highlight reel (MP4) that scrolls each real article to the…

    1.5k GitHub stars~3.9k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Icp Evidence Analysis

    elvisun/newsjack

    Turn a source-bound company and market dossier into testable ideal-customer-profile hypotheses, buying roles, triggers, constraints, disqualifiers, standing, counterevidence, and research gaps.

    1.5k GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Research any company, product, or service from a URL plus description and build a comprehensive, evidence-bound AEO/GEO/AI-visibility prompt panel across buyer jobs, information acts, journey…

    1.5k GitHub stars~3.1k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Reactive Comment

    elvisun/newsjack

    Triage inbound journalist source queries and draft a response only when the user's expertise is a real fit.

    1.5k GitHub stars~5.6k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Newsworthiness Check

What does Newsworthiness Check do?

Score whether a news event is worth newsjacking, or whether a user's pitch idea is actually newsworthy to journalists. Newsworthiness Check is an agent skill from elvisun/newsjack. Score whether a news event is worth newsjacking, or whether a user's pitch idea is actually newsworthy to journalists.

How do I install Newsworthiness Check in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add elvisun/newsjack --skill newsworthiness-check -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/newsworthiness-check in elvisun/newsjack) into .claude/skills/newsworthiness-check in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Newsworthiness Check in Codex?

Run `npx skills add elvisun/newsjack --skill newsworthiness-check -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/newsworthiness-check in elvisun/newsjack) into .agents/skills/newsworthiness-check in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Newsworthiness Check in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add elvisun/newsjack --skill newsworthiness-check -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/newsworthiness-check, .gemini/skills/newsworthiness-check, .github/skills/newsworthiness-check and .opencode/skills/newsworthiness-check in your project.

What does Newsworthiness Check need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Newsworthiness Check is instructions for the agent only.

Does Newsworthiness Check access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Newsworthiness Check safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Newsworthiness Check use?

Newsworthiness Check is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Newsworthiness Check use?

About 5.2k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 21k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Newsworthiness Check?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Newsworthiness Check: Markdown Article Formatter (JimLiu/baoyu-skills, 27k stars), Social (coreyhaines31/marketingskills, 54k stars), Markitdown (ImCa0/just-laws, 781 stars) and Obsidian Markdown (Atmosphere/atmosphere, 3.8k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Newsworthiness Check?

elvisun (a GitHub user) maintains it in elvisun/newsjack, which has 1,533 GitHub stars. The repository holds 30 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 7, 2026.

Source: elvisun/newsjack on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.