AA analyzing-competitor-instagram-content-strategy
Analyzes a competitor's Instagram content strategy and performance using apidojo's Instagram scraper on Apify. Triggers when the user asks to: analyze what a competitor posts on Instagram, benchmark a competitor's Instagram engagement, see what content types perform best for a competitor on Instagram, reverse-engineer a competitor's Instagram content calendar, identify content gaps vs. a competitor on Instagram, compare posting frequency or content themes, or understand why a competitor's Instagram is growing. Returns post frequency, content type mix, top-performing posts, hashtag strategy, and engagement benchmarks. Ideal for social media managers, brand strategists, and content marketing teams.
Analyzes a competitor's Instagram content strategy and performance using apidojo's Instagram scraper on Apify.
As a process A 81/100 · Runs to the end — weak spots: progress reporting
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Exfiltration
exfil-secret-in-urlSKILL.md:86Credential passed in a URL query string (normal for some APIs — verify the host is the intended service) (placeholder value)curl -X POST "https://api.apify.com/v2/acts/apidojo~instagram-scraper/runs?token=…" -H "Content-Type: application/json" -d '{"usernames": ["competitor_handle"], "maxItems": 50}'placeholder -
low Exfiltration
net-credential-useSKILL.md:86Credential used in a network call (verify the destination is the intended service) (the skill's own vendor host)curl -X POST "https://api.apify.com/v2/acts/apidojo~instagram-scraper/runs?token=…" -H "Content-Type: application/json" -d '{"usernames": ["competitor_handle"], "maxItems": 50}'vendor-host
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 81/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 6 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1308 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 705: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 6 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (8 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 88.