Vidiq New Upload Review

---
name: vidiq-new-upload-review
description: Assess a new YouTube upload against its channel's performance at the same publication age. Recommend whether to wait, inspect packaging, or reassess during its first hours or days.
---

# vidIQ New Upload Review

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

Judge a new upload against the channel's performance at the same publication age. Recommend
whether to hold, inspect, or prepare a packaging change; do not change YouTube metadata/settings.

## Compare the trajectory

1. Establish video, channel, goal, format, publication time, and current age from supplied context.
   Use a bounded evidence plan.
2. For “my channel” or private analytics, resolve the authorized target with `vidiq_user_channels`.
   For “my newest upload,” use `vidiq_channel_videos` with `popular: false` and confirmed
   `videoFormat: long`, `short`, or `live`, then confirm the returned video.
3. Use `vidiq_get_videos_by_ids` for context, `vidiq_video_stats` for history, and
   `vidiq_channel_performance_trends` for the recent-video post-publication curve.
   Stats requires `granularity`: prefer `hourly` for early launches; use coarser intervals only
   when age/window warrants them.
4. Compare cumulative `views` at equivalent `minutesSincePublication`. Use returned
   `views.perc30`, median, and `views.perc70`; missing percentiles are unavailable, not replaceable
   by min/max. VPH is not cumulative views. Disclose age mismatch and mixed-format limitations
   of the channel-wide curve. Do not manufacture checkpoints or extrapolate beyond observations.

## Choose the next action

- **Hold:** evidence is sparse, incomparable, or insufficient to justify intervention.
- **Inspect:** repeated weakness against an age-matched baseline warrants investigation.
  A percentile crossing alone cannot identify packaging as the cause.
- **Prepare a change:** weakness has corroboration from supported analytics, supplied Studio
  data, or qualitative comments, with competing explanations and confidence stated.
  Without corroboration, keep the decision at hold or inspect.

Inspect only decision-relevant evidence within scope: authorized `vidiq_channel_analytics`,
supplied Studio CTR/impressions, or `vidiq_video_comments`. Thumbnail CTR/impressions are not in
the analytics metric enum; annotation CTR and ad impressions are not substitutes. Comments and
scores cannot prove low CTR or its cause. Use `vidiq_score_title`/`vidiq_score_thumbnail` only
when useful within the requested diagnosis.

A known factual or formatting error can warrant correction at any age, independently of
performance. Choose a reassessment point from the observed channel curve, with no universal
waiting period or fixed checkpoint count.

## Deliver

Report publication age, evidence window, observed trajectory/bands and their gaps, and the
count/ages of checkpoints used. Give the decision, strongest evidence for and against it,
confidence, and next measurement/checkpoint. An unresolved video or channel prevents a trajectory
claim; a recommendation does not mean a change was applied.