Title: Built a deterministic content scoring API because LLMs kept giving me different scores for the same post
I kept running into a fundamental problem with LLM-based content scoring: ask the same model to score the same tweet twice and you get different numbers. For a "publish/hold" quality gate, that variance is a dealbreaker.
So I built ContentForge! A pure heuristic engine that scores social content 0-100 with zero variance. Same input, same score, always.
What it does:
- 50 endpoints, 12 platforms (Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Pinterest, Reddit, Threads, Facebook, email, ad copy, readability)
- Every score under 50ms — no inference, no model loading
- Returns
quality_gate: PASSED/REVIEW/FAILED+ itemized deductions showing exactly why /v1/auto_improve: score → if not PASSED → AI rewrites it → re-scores → loops until PASSED (up to 5 iterations). Generator and scorer in a closed feedback loop.- Chrome extension scores as you type on any of those platforms
The honest trade-off: LLMs are smarter. They understand nuance a rule engine never will. But for a quality gate that runs in automation pipelines, I'll take consistent and auditable over smart and unpredictable.
AI is still in the system (Gemini for rewrites and content generation), just not in the scoring path. /v1/auto_improve is where the two sides meet.
Links:
- GitHub (AGPL-3.0): https://github.com/CaptainFredric/ContentForge
- Live demo: https://nullmark.tech/r/contentforge
- API (free tier): https://rapidapi.com/captainarmoreddude/api/contentforge1
Open to feedback on the heuristic weights! There's a /v1/feedback endpoint specifically for "this score feels wrong" reports.
Da Calibration Challenge (For Ultra Access!!!):
The heuristic weights are based on platform best-practices documentation, not yet validated against a real performance corpus. I'm running a Blind Taste Test to fix that.
Submit 10 historical posts! 5 that performed well, 5 that flopped, without telling me which is which. I'll run them through the scoring engine and return a ranked order. You tell me if I got it right.
If the engine correctly identifies your top performers: You get lifetime Ultra API access (3,000 AI calls/month, every endpoint, no expiry) + your anonymized results appear in the public validation report.
If it gets it wrong: The mismatch tells me exactly which signal weights are off — that's a direct R&D contribution, and you still get a full score breakdown for all 10 posts.
Basically win-win!
Details + submission template: #4
Need 10 more participants to hit statistical confidence before the Product Hunt relaunch.....