# Review brief — MCP Steroid v0.95.0 social posts

You are reviewing the social-media post drafts for MCP Steroid v0.95.0. The drafts live at:

`/Users/jonnyzzz/Work/mcp-steroid/release/prompts/0.95.0-social-posts.md`

Read that file in full. The release notes — which the posts must accurately represent — live at:

`/Users/jonnyzzz/Work/mcp-steroid/release/notes/0.95.0.md`
`/Users/jonnyzzz/Work/mcp-steroid/website/content/releases/0.95.0.md`

For context on the project's design tenets and target audience, you may also consult:

`/Users/jonnyzzz/Work/mcp-steroid/docs/PHILOSOPHY.md`
`/Users/jonnyzzz/Work/mcp-steroid/README.md`

The previous release's post drafts (0.94.0) — kept as a reference for the established tone, length, and structure — are at:

`/Users/jonnyzzz/Work/mcp-steroid/release/prompts/0.94.0-social-posts.md`

## What you must produce

Write your review as a short, direct memo. **Under 500 words.** No preamble, no recap of what the posts already say. Lead with verdict, then enumerate issues. End with a one-sentence recommendation (ship as-is / ship with edits / rework).

## What to check

1. **Factual accuracy against the release notes.** Every claim in the posts (`#27`, `#33`, "10 tools", "0 internal-API usages on 2025.3 and 2026.1", "100 ms probe", the McpEditingGuard before/after flow, etc.) must match the source. Flag any drift.

2. **Hook strength.** The LinkedIn post opens with McpEditingGuard. The single tweet leads with the same. Is that the right lead, or does another item land harder for the target audience (IntelliJ devs evaluating agentic-coding tooling)?

3. **Tone consistency with 0.94.0.** Same "IntelliJ for AI Agents, not humans" framing, same structural pattern (numbered points, hashtags, release-notes link). Flag tonal drift or jargon that wouldn't have appeared in 0.94.0.

4. **Length on LinkedIn.** The current draft is ~280 words. The 0.94.0 post was ~250. Is the current draft too long? Note that point 4 (DialogWindowsLookup) is identified internally as the candidate to drop if trimming is needed — agree or disagree?

5. **Length on X.** Each tweet must be under 280 characters. Spot-check the thread.

6. **Hashtag set.** The LinkedIn tag set is unchanged from 0.94.0 (`#MCPSteroid #IntelliJ #AgenticCoding #MCP #AIAgents #JetBrains #OpenSource #AndroidStudio #Codex #Claude`). Is anything stale or worth swapping?

7. **Anything missing.** Is there a 0.95.0 highlight from the release notes that deserves a post slot but isn't in the draft? The release notes also cover: tool-handler `Spec + Handler + IJ Service` split (internal), `required_plugins` parameter removal, `McpScriptContext.params` drop, editor-config + `.*` import cleanup, regression tests pinned. None of these are user-facing; do not promote them unless you have a strong reason.

## What NOT to do

- Do not rewrite the posts. List what's wrong; let Eugene own the rewrite.
- Do not invent claims that aren't in the release notes.
- Do not mention specific Claude / Codex / Gemini model versions or capabilities — they date quickly.
- Do not suggest emoji or fluff additions.

Be concrete. Cite line numbers when flagging an issue.
