Inbound-triggers monitor (engagement → warm rows)

The insight: this is a ranking problem wearing a detection problem's clothes. Every other monitor asks "did the event happen?" — the event either fired or it didn't. Here the platform hands you a truncated, self-contaminated top-N sample of the people who engaged, and three things follow that the naive build gets wrong:

1. The cap is the platform's, not your budget's. Reactions max out at 50 per post, comments at 10, shares at 10 — and every one of them defaults to 10 if you don't pass the limit. A post with 400 reactions yields 50 on a good day and 10 by default. So a viral post is less observable than a quiet one, and absence of a person from the feed is never evidence they didn't engage.
2. Your loudest engagers are your own people. Employees, the company page itself, and partner accounts sit at the top of every reaction list. An inbound monitor without a suppression gate reports your own marketing team as buying intent — and it does it confidently, because those rows are real interactions.
3. The same human appears many times. One person who reacts to four posts and comments on two is six rows and one lead. Deduplicating by event (what a news monitor does) is wrong here; the key is the person, and the interactions are their intensity.