Naver AI Briefing citation

Write a new Naver Blog post, or rework an old one, along the lines Naver Search published for content that its AI Briefing (AI 브리핑) cites, look at what AI Briefing shows for the keyword today, and check afterwards whether the post was cited. Naver decides what gets cited. This skill makes a post meet Naver's stated criteria and says plainly where it does not; it never promises a citation.

Sources, all on Naver Search's official blog:

• Content guide (2026-05-26): https://blog.naver.com/naver_search/224296857688 (five principles, five things to avoid, FAQ)
• Practical guide (2026-06-04): https://blog.naver.com/naver_search/224305800678 (five self-checks, good and bad examples)
• Background (2026-05-28): https://blog.naver.com/naver_search/224290490478 (Naver Mate, 네이버 메이트: creators are picked every month by topic, mainly on how often their content is cited in AI Briefing)

Open references/official-guide.md before checking a draft: it has Naver's item titles in Korean, Naver's own check questions, and a line on each.

Three layers, three results

• Official, 15 items: the five principles, the five self-checks and the five things to avoid, from the two guides.
• Common practice, 3 items, not in Naver's text: the conclusion in the first paragraph, question-style subheadings, and a short FAQ at the end. Recommend them, and label each one "not in Naver's text" wherever you show it. Naver's own guide ends with an FAQ, but none of its criteria asks a post to have one. Uplika compared posts AI Briefing quoted with posts it did not: question-style subheadings and an FAQ made no difference, and an early conclusion helped only a little. Offer them; do not insist.
• Measured by Uplika: what Uplika measured about the sentences AI Briefing actually quoted. It comes with one tool, not with this skill: check_naver_visibility returns it as citationRules, in two parts. rules are the confirmed ones (grade A): check them like the items above, label them "measured by Uplika", and keep them apart from Naver's items. suggestions are weaker (grade B, each with its evidence and caveat): treat them like the common practices and only offer them, label each one "measured by Uplika, weaker", and never mark them pass or gap. Use both exactly as that tool gave them in this conversation. If the tool has not returned them, leave this layer out and say so; do not recall rules from memory. A keyword set's draftPrompt ends with Naver's six self-check lines and a short version of these measured rules, both offered as suggestions. They are the same rules, so do not count them as another layer; the full set with grades and evidence comes from check_naver_visibility.

Every item in these layers gets exactly one result, except the measured suggestions, which are only offered: