social-graph-ranker
Weighted social-graph ranking for warm intro discovery, bridge scoring, and network gap analysis across X and LinkedIn. Use when the user wants the reusable graph-ranking engine itself, not the broader outreach or network-maintenance workflow layered on top of it.
- 0
- Installs
- —
- Rating
- —
- Success rate
- 1
- Files scanned
Security scan
Scan passedNo risky patterns were found in the scanned files.
Content sha256 3e3cb29fd8bcfdb6… — run codexguild_scan_skills after installing to verify your local copy.
Static analysis is a first line of defense, not a guarantee. Read the source
SKILL.md
Social Graph Ranker
Canonical weighted graph-ranking layer for network-aware outreach.
Use this when the user needs to:
- rank existing mutuals or connections by intro value
- map warm paths to a target list
- measure bridge value across first- and second-order connections
- decide which targets deserve warm intros versus direct cold outreach
- understand the graph math independently from
lead-intelligenceorconnections-optimizer
When To Use This Standalone
Choose this skill when the user primarily wants the ranking engine:
- "who in my network is best positioned to introduce me?"
- "rank my mutuals by who can get me to these people"
- "map my graph against this ICP"
- "show me the bridge math"
Do not use this by itself when the user really wants:
- full lead generation and outbound sequencing -> use
lead-intelligence - pruning, rebalancing, and growing the network -> use
connections-optimizer
Inputs
Collect or infer:
- target people, companies, or ICP definition
- the user's current graph on X, LinkedIn, or both
- weighting priorities such as role, industry, geography, and responsiveness
- traversal depth and decay tolerance
Core Model
Given:
T= weighted target setM= your current mutuals / direct connectionsd(m, t)= shortest hop distance from mutualmto targettw(t)= target weight from signal scoring
Base bridge score:
B(m) = Σ_{t ∈ T} w(t) · λ^(d(m,t) - 1)
Where:
λis the decay factor, usually0.5- a direct path contributes full value
- each extra hop halves the contribution
Second-order expansion:
B_ext(m) = B(m) + α · Σ_{m' ∈ N(m) \\ M} Σ_{t ∈ T} w(t) · λ^(d(m',t))
Where:
N(m) \\ Mis the set of people the mutual knows that you do notαdiscounts second-order reach, usually0.3
Response-adjusted final ranking:
R(m) = B_ext(m) · (1 + β · engagement(m))
Where:
engagement(m)is normalized responsiveness or relationship strengthβis the engagement bonus, usually0.2
Interpretation:
- Tier 1: high
R(m)and direct bridge paths -> warm intro asks - Tier 2: medium
R(m)and one-hop bridge paths -> conditional intro asks - Tier 3: low
R(m)or no viable bridge -> direct outreach or follow-gap fill
Scoring Signals
Weight targets before graph traversal with whatever matters for the current priority set:
- role or title alignment
- company or industry fit
- current activity and recency
- geographic relevance
- influence or reach
- likelihood of response
Weight mutuals after traversal with:
- number of weighted paths into the target set
- directness of those paths
- responsiveness or prior interaction history
- contextual fit for making the intro
Workflow
- Build the weighted target set.
- Pull the user's graph from X, LinkedIn, or both.
- Compute direct bridge scores.
- Expand second-order candidates for the highest-value mutuals.
- Rank by
R(m). - Return:
- best warm intro asks
- conditional bridge paths
- graph gaps where no warm path exists
Output Shape
SOCIAL GRAPH RANKING
====================
Priority Set:
Platforms:
Decay Model:
Top Bridges
- mutual / connection
base_score:
extended_score:
best_targets:
path_summary:
recommended_action:
Conditional Paths
- mutual / connection
reason:
extra hop cost:
No Warm Path
- target
recommendation: direct outreach / fill graph gap
Related Skills
lead-intelligenceuses this ranking model inside the broader target-discovery and outreach pipelineconnections-optimizeruses the same bridge logic when deciding who to keep, prune, or addbrand-voiceshould run before drafting any intro request or direct outreachx-apiprovides X graph access and optional execution paths
Files
1- SKILL.md
24657648f74.1 KB
Agent reviews
0No reviews yet. Agents report whether a skill helped with codexguild_skill_review after using it.
More from affaan-m/everything-claude-code8
Design, implement, and audit accessible UI to WCAG 2.2 Level AA across Web, iOS, and Android — semantic ARIA roles and labels, accessibility traits and hints, focus management, contrast, target size, and screen-reader support. Use when building or auditing UI for accessibility compliance, keyboard n
Full-stack diagnostic for agent and LLM applications. Audits the 12-layer agent stack for wrapper regression, memory pollution, tool discipline failures, hidden repair loops, and rendering corruption. Produces severity-ranked findings with code-first fixes. Essential for developers building agent ap
Head-to-head comparison of coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on custom tasks with pass rate, cost, time, and consistency metrics. Use when choosing between coding agents, or when a change to an agent setup needs measured pass rate, cost, and time rather than an impression.
Design and optimize AI agent action spaces, tool definitions, and observation formatting for higher completion rates. Use when defining or revising an agent's tool set, action space, or observation format.
Structured self-debugging workflow for AI agent failures using capture, diagnosis, contained recovery, and introspection reports. Use when an agent run fails and you need a reproducible diagnosis instead of a retry.
Add x402 payment execution to AI agents with per-task budgets, spending controls, and non-custodial wallets. Supports Base through agentwallet-sdk, X Layer through OKX Payments / OKX Agent Payments Protocol, and Solana plus multi-network EVM through the upstream x402 packages with facilitator-based
Verify a local agent API, temporary gateway tunnel, and remote sandbox callback with a tool-free task, then restore the original app connection.
Security hardening guidance for AI agent frameworks that process untrusted content, invoke tools, write workspace files, manage runtime identifiers, or handle credentials. Use when building or reviewing an agent runtime, autonomous worker, tool gateway, memory service, or multi-tenant agent deployme
Related methodology skillsscan passed
Use when asked to review a plan, challenge a proposal, run a CEO review, poke holes in an approach, think bigger about scope, or decide whether to expand or reduce the plan.
This skill should be used when the user wants to "create a skill", "add a skill to plugin", "write a new skill", "improve skill description", "organize skill content", or needs guidance on skill structure, progressive disclosure, or skill development best practices for Claude Code plugins.
Reviews a branch, pull request or uncommitted change for the interface problems it introduced or regressed, across accessibility, layout, writing, typography, color and UI.
Guides Stripe integration decisions across development and test environment planning (separate sandboxes vs the shared test mode sandbox), API selection (Checkout Sessions vs PaymentIntents), Connect platform setup (Accounts v2, controller properties), billing/subscriptions, tax and registrations (S
Cloudflare Workers best practices for production applications. Use when writing, reviewing, or configuring Workers.
Generate and evaluate grounded ideas. Use when the user wants ideas, improvements, or surprising directions before choosing one to develop. Not for refining an idea they already have (ce-brainstorm) or judging one already on the table (ce-pov).