Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →This skill should be used when the user asks to "analyze tweets", "grow on Twitter", "build Twitter threads", "optimize X posting schedule", "track follower growth", "improve tweet engagement", or "create a Twitter content strategy".
.claude/skills/borghei-x-twitter-growth/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 57% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -1% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 31% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -3% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -18% | 0% |
Production-ready X/Twitter growth toolkit for analyzing tweet performance patterns, structuring optimal threads, and tracking engagement metrics. Designed for creators, marketers, and brand accounts looking to grow audience and engagement systematically through data-driven content decisions.
Before generating, confirm these inputs. If any is unknown or vague, ASK — do not assume:
Stop rule: ask only the 2-3 that most change the output. If the user says "just draft it," proceed and list your assumptions at the top of the artifact.
bash# Analyze tweet performance patterns from exported data python scripts/tweet_analyzer.py tweets.csv # Structure long-form content into optimal Twitter threads python scripts/thread_builder.py content.txt --target-tweets 8 # Track follower growth, engagement rates, and best posting times python scripts/growth_tracker.py analytics.csv --period monthly
| Tool | Purpose | Input | Output | |------|---------|-------|--------| | tweet_analyzer.py | Performance pattern analysis | CSV with tweet data | Engagement patterns + insights | | thread_builder.py | Thread structuring | Text file or JSON | Formatted thread + hooks | | growth_tracker.py | Growth & engagement tracking | CSV with analytics data | Growth report + best times |
tweet_analyzer.py to identify top-performing patternsthread_builder.py to split into optimal thread structuregrowth_tracker.pygrowth_tracker.py --period monthly for growth metricstweet_analyzer.py on the same period for content insightsSee references/x-growth-playbook.md for comprehensive strategies covering:
csvtweet_id,text,created_at,impressions,engagements,likes,retweets,replies,type,has_media T001,"Here's what I learned...",2025-06-15 09:30:00,15000,850,320,95,45,thread_start,no T002,"Check out this chart",2025-06-14 14:00:00,8500,420,180,35,22,single,yes
text# How I Grew to 50K Followers in 6 Months The biggest lesson was consistency over virality. Here's the complete breakdown... [Section 1: Finding Your Niche] Most creators make the mistake of being too broad. Pick one topic and go deep... [Section 2: Content Pillars] I built 3 content pillars that I rotate through each week...
| Metric | Low | Average | Good | Excellent | |--------|-----|---------|------|-----------| | Engagement Rate | < 1% | 1-3% | 3-6% | > 6% | | Reply Rate | < 0.1% | 0.1-0.5% | 0.5-1% | > 1% | | Retweet Rate | < 0.2% | 0.2-1% | 1-3% | > 3% | | Thread Completion | < 20% | 20-40% | 40-60% | > 60% |
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | pass→pass | 15,720 | 5,905 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,334 | 2,028 | -13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | pass→pass | 8,261 | 4,674 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,294 | 1,822 | +41% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 6,605 | 4,389 | -34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,069 | 1,819 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 12,162 | 12,162 | 0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,904 | 2,983 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 9,764 | 2,650 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,493 | 1,472 | -1% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 5,931 | 4,076 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 822 | 1,366 | +66% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 6,570 | 1,645 | -75% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,022 | 1,337 | +31% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 9,509 | 6,848 | -28% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,671 | 2,451 | +47% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 10,260 | 3,499 | -66% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,663 | 1,610 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 11,420 | 2,890 | -75% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,841 | 1,503 | -18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 9,158 | 2,537 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,494 | 1,514 | +1% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 6,952 | 3,861 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,175 | 1,695 | +44% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 15,353 | 6,549 | -57% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,427 | 2,315 | -5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 11,108 | 2,290 | -79% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,752 | 1,482 | -15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 5,720 | 3,762 | -34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 860 | 1,745 | +103% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | 16,340 | 15,474 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,478 | 3,631 | +47% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | 18,451 | 21,723 | +18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,826 | 4,371 | +55% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | 17,482 | 12,887 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,497 | 3,358 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 7,723 | 2,475 | -68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,335 | 1,519 | +14% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 5,462 | 2,082 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 743 | 1,407 | +89% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 7,503 | 2,546 | -66% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,111 | 1,457 | +31% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 9,866 | 3,802 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,565 | 1,690 | +8% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +45 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.