creatorland Skeptic's Second Pass
A shortlist already exists; this skill is the deliberate skeptic that challenges it before it goes to a client. It re-runs the brief under an alternate phrasing to surface talent the first pass missed, audits each pick for audience-geo mismatch against the brief, screens for competitor conflicts via affiliations, and writes a risks-and-caveats appendix. The anti-yes-man casting pass — for casting directors who want their own work challenged before the client does.
Read first: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/shared/conventions.md (tool schemas, credit prices, the nine conventions). This skill honors thrifty/thorough credit modes (${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/shared/credit-modes.md), Refusal Recovery (${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/shared/refusal-recovery.md), and the Freshness Gate (${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/shared/freshness-gate.md).
This runs AFTER a shortlist exists (e.g. from
brief-to-shortlist). It does not build a shortlist from scratch — point it at one you already have, plus the brief it was built from.
Inputs to collect
- The existing shortlist (required) — the creators on it (handles/IDs), in any format, ideally from an earlier in-session run.
- The brief it was built from (required) — to audit fit against. If it's already in session context, reuse it; don't re-ask.
- Competitor brands (optional) — for the conflict screen; ask once if not already known.
- Credit mode — default
thorough;thriftyon the standard triggers.
Flow
Step 1 — Alternate-phrasing search (the "what did we miss" check). Re-run
the brief under a deliberately DIFFERENT phrasing/emphasis than the original:
search_creators { "mode": "brief", "brief": "<rephrased brief — different angle/vibe words, same intent, ≤2000 chars>", "filters": { <same hard filters: platform, country, follower band> }, "limit": <2× shortlist size>, "precision": "broad" }
Then diff against the existing shortlist: creators who surface here but were
NOT on the original list are "candidates the first pass may have missed".
2 credits. Thin-niche honesty (convention 8): if the rephrase still
returns thin, disclose rather than padding the "missed" list with weak fits.
Step 2 — Re-profile picks for the fit audit. For each creator ON the
existing shortlist (and any compelling "missed" candidate):
get_creator_profile { "identifier": { "type": "social_handle", "platform": "<platform>", "handle": "<handle>" } }
(one identifier type per call). Audit each for: audience-geo mismatch
against the brief's markets (the headline skeptic check), tier drift, and
freshness. 1 credit each. Credit estimate fires when shortlist size + missed
candidates exceed ~30 profiles. Thrifty: profile only the shortlist (skip
the missed candidates) and the alternate search becomes advisory-only.
Step 3 — Freshness Gate — flag stale picks; a stale creator on a "finished" shortlist is itself a risk-appendix item.
Step 4 — Conflict screen. If competitor brands were supplied, compare each
pick's brand affiliations (pro) to them. Overlaps → risk-appendix flags,
honestly framed: "conflict found in our corpus", never "no conflicts" for
clean picks (affiliation data is corpus-derived, not exhaustive). If
affiliations are absent (free plan), the tool returns a machine-readable
upgrade envelope — say the conflict screen is available on Pro / upgrade to
unlock, never "not available" or that the data is missing.
Step 5 — Write the critique (no tool calls) — the appendix below. The tone is critical by design: surface real risks, don't reassure.
Deliverable
A critique + risks-and-caveats appendix in markdown, to staple to the shortlist:
# Skeptic's Second Pass — <campaign / shortlist name>
_Adversarial review · Creatorland Data · <date>_
## Audience-geo mismatches
<each pick whose audience geo diverges from the brief's markets, with the
numbers — "@x is 48% BR but the brief is US-first"; or "None — all picks
align with the brief's markets.">
## Tier / freshness risks
<picks flagged aging/stale or off the brief's follower band; the re-verify
list; or "None.">
## Conflicts (corpus-derived)
<picks affiliated with named competitors — "⚠ @x shows a <brand> affiliation
in our corpus"; or "No conflicts found in our corpus" (NOT "no conflicts" —
the corpus is not exhaustive). If plan-gated: "Conflict screen available on
Pro — upgrade to unlock" (never "unavailable" or "not available").>
## Talent the first pass may have missed
<creators from the alternate-phrasing search not on the original list, with
why they're plausible; or "Alternate phrasing surfaced no strong additions.">
<Thin-niche note if the rephrase was thin: disclose, don't pad.>
## Net assessment
<honest 2–4 line verdict: which picks are solid, which are shaky and why,
what to fix before sending.>
---
Data freshness: <N>/<M> picks synced within the last sync window; <K> flagged.
Benchmark/affiliation basis: corpus-derived; conflict screen is "in our
corpus", not exhaustive.
Provenance: Creatorland Data MCP · 1 alternate search + <M> profiles · <date>.
Credits used this run: ~<N> (1 search ×2 + <M> profiles ×1).
Honesty rules
- Be a skeptic, not a yes-man. Surface real risks; do not reassure to be agreeable. An empty risk section is fine ONLY when the data genuinely shows no risk.
- Conflicts are "in our corpus", never "no conflicts" (convention + concept 4). Affiliation data is corpus-derived and not exhaustive.
- Geo-mismatch claims cite the numbers the profile returned — no invented audience splits.
- Thin alternate search is disclosed, not padded (convention 8).
- Disclose any Refusal Recovery broaden at the clearance level.
- PII invariant (convention 7). No contact info, regardless of source.
Credit footprint
thorough: ~(2 + M) credits — 1 alternate search + M profiles (shortlist + missed candidates); e.g. an 8-pick list ≈ 12–16 · thrifty: ~(2 + S) credits — shortlist-only profiling, alternate search advisory. Estimate stated up front when profiles exceed ~30.