skills/vidiq-next-video-planner/SKILL.md

---
name: vidiq-next-video-planner
description: Rank original next-video opportunities for an authorized YouTube channel using channel fit, competitors, outliers, search demand, and trend timing. Use for topic selection and evidence-based briefs, without generating assets or changing state.
---

# vidIQ Next Video Planner

Read [Live surface notes](references/live-surface-notes.md) first, even when using only supplied evidence.

Rank next-video opportunities from channel fit, competitors, demand, and timing. Keep this workflow
read-only: no generation, packaging scoring, refinement, or mutations.

## Scope and channel fit

1. Use supplied audience, format, language/market, horizon, constraints, and goal. Ask one compact
   question only for gaps affecting tool inputs or ranking.
2. Use a capped evidence plan: start with one call per relevant lane and expand only for facts
   that could change the decision.
3. Resolve the intended authorized channel with `vidiq_user_channels`. For recent channel fit,
   use `vidiq_channel_videos` with `popular: false` and matching `videoFormat: long`, `short`,
   or `live`.
4. Request `vidiq_channel_analytics` with explicit dates, `dimensions: ["video"]`, and
   `filters: "video==ID1,ID2"` for those IDs in batches of at most 150. Set `maxResults` to cover
   the batch within live limits and join by video ID. Missing rows are unknown; a mixed-format
   top-N report cannot define recent same-format fit. Compare sensible publication ages and
   label the upload set a sample. If private analytics are declined, disclose that missing lane.

## Research useful evidence lanes

Read [Discovery evidence](references/discovery-evidence.md) when discovering or evaluating
candidate opportunities, including supplied examples.

- **Competitors:** use `vidiq_list_competitors` when useful. Exclude self, known siblings, and
  unrelated channels from the analysis cohort; disclose uncertain ownership/fit and leave the
  saved list unchanged. Otherwise use `vidiq_similar_channels` with canonical `channelId` and
  optional `size`/`sort`. Manual `niche` mode has separate filters, no `subNiches` field, and
  ranking preferences that require checking returned fit.
- **Outliers:** gate the format/language combination before `vidiq_outliers`. Shorts are restricted
  to English; outliers and trending have no live-only lane. For non-English outliers, `all` narrows
  to long-form and discovery is capped at six months. Pass supported `contentType` and `language`;
  never silently substitute English or another format. Cluster premises, audience needs, and
  payoffs. Treat absent matches as a sampling limit, not proof of an unclaimed opportunity.
- **Search demand:** use `vidiq_keyword_research` with `mode: "research"`, seed `keyword`, and
  optional supported `country`. For momentum, `rising` uses `period` and `language`; discover
  `availableTopics` before supplying a `topic`. It has no arbitrary `keyword`/`country`
  filter. Keep measured demand/growth separate from scores or ranking; missing, stale, or
  nonpositive baselines cannot establish relative growth.
- **Timing:** `vidiq_trending_videos` measures absolute velocity in the confirmed format and
  market. `vidiq_video_stats` on a finalist can test acceleration/decay; choose required
  `granularity: hourly`, `daily`, or `monthly` to match its age/window. Normalize epoch-second
  outlier dates and ISO timestamps before age comparisons. Do not equate velocity with
  channel-relative outlier performance.

Apply the shared relevance/independence rule to every discovery lane. For cross-niche mechanisms,
match viewer motivation and use semantic `requireAllTitleTerms: false`; strict matching is
supporting evidence only on tools declaring that field. Inspect actual images or mark visual
findings provisional.

## Decide and deliver

Compare up to three supported opportunities, or the requested count, on channel fit, competitive
opportunity, demand, timing, originality, and feasibility. Use ordinal judgments; do not sum
incompatible metrics. Prefer corroborating evidence types and state what could change the choice.

Return the shortlist and strongest supported brief with evidence scope/dates, confidence, and
counterevidence. Use original framing, examples, and expression. If evidence cannot support a
choice, state the gap; do not force a winner.