Demo
Problem
I have a bad habit of firing off a post and deleting it twenty minutes later. The gap between how a draft reads to me and how it reads to a hiring manager is invisible until after it is sent.
Solution
A gate rather than willpower. Supertweet scores a draft against criteria you define once — tone, whether there is an actual claim in there, whether it reads as a jab at a named person — then replays it through several audience perspectives.
It works as a linter too: point it at a draft and it flags the specific lines that trip your own rules. And it will refuse to send — below a threshold you set, the post is locked and the panel shows what would lift it, each suggestion with the points it is worth.
Chrome extension and web app, both shipped in a day, working on X and LinkedIn.
Analysis
The audience replay turns out to be more useful than the score. The same post read as a hiring manager and as a peer in the field are frequently two different posts, and the score cannot tell you that.
The reach scoring is a heuristic built from observed patterns rather than any privileged knowledge of a ranking system, and it is worth saying so plainly.
The part doing the real work is not the model. It is the pause.
Result
The screenshot is the tool grading a post about itself. It scored 5.0 and locked it, on the grounds that the draft read like a feature list with no screenshot, no result and nothing learned from building it.
That was correct, and it is the reason there is a screenshot on this page.
Screens
Grading a post about itself, and refusing to send it: 5.0, locked, needs 8. The critique is the useful part — reads like a feature list, no screenshot, no result.