mblode/copywriting

Copywriting

• IS: short conversion copy (landing pages, hero, subheads, CTAs, product descriptions, onboarding strings, email subjects); product-state strings (destructive CTAs, error, success, empty, loading, permission copy); stripping AI writing tells from any copy.
• IS NOT: long-form articles or posts (use blog-post), slide or deck copy (use presentation-creator), API/product/reference docs (use docs-writing), or deciding which action exists, its scope, consequence, reversibility, or reachable states (use product-design; this skill writes final wording once those are decided).

Two modes, auto-detected (do not ask):

• Copy exists or user pasted copy to fix: Mode B (Edit).
• Nothing written yet, or user wants something new: Mode A (Write).
• Genuinely ambiguous ("improve this", no copy in scope): ask one question, then commit.

Reference files

| File | Read when | |------|-----------| | references/frameworks.md | Pick a framework (Write Step 4); audit against the nine frameworks (Edit Step 3) | | references/page-types.md | Copy norms for a known page type (Write Step 4) | | references/word-lists.md | Flag Tier 1/2/3 AI vocabulary (Edit Step 4) | | references/ai-patterns.md | Flag structural/sentence-level AI tells; P0/P1/P2 triage (Edit Step 4) | | references/sweeps.md | Run the seven line-level sweeps (Edit Step 5) | | references/ui-states.md | Name actions, write destructive CTAs, error/success/empty/loading-state and permission copy |

---

Mode A: Writing new copy

Writing progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Gather context
- [ ] Step 2: State the brief, then write
- [ ] Step 3: Discover brand voice
- [ ] Step 4: Choose framework and load references
- [ ] Step 5: Write 2-3 alternatives
- [ ] Step 6: Recommend and explain
- [ ] Step 7: Verify every line before handing back

Step 1: Gather context

Settle all four before writing, from the user or from the files. Where the files do not settle one, infer it and name the inference in Step 2; the failure mode is an invented audience or goal presented as fact.

1. Page purpose. The one action this page drives (sign up, book a demo, download).
2. Audience. The specific reader: job title, pain, what they've already tried.
3. Product. What it does; the concrete user outcome.
4. Traffic source. Where the reader comes from (cold ad, warm email, organic search, referral).

Traffic source sets temperature: cold needs more Why; warm can lead with How or What.

Step 2: State the brief, then write

State the brief and keep going. Mark every field you inferred rather than were told, so the user can correct it against real copy instead of against a question:

Brief:
- Page: [page type]
- Goal: [single action]
- Reader: [specific audience]
- Core outcome: [what changes for the reader]
- Tone: [inferred from brand voice or user-stated]
- Traffic temperature: [cold / warm / hot]

Inferred (correct me): [fields you guessed]

Stop and ask before writing only when a wrong guess makes the work useless or unsafe: the copy ships in this turn with no review, or the goal is genuinely unknown and each candidate goal produces different copy.

Step 3: Discover brand voice

Find voice signals before inventing one; never default to generic corporate warmth.

• Read existing copy files, README headers, or marketing pages if accessible.
• If nothing exists, infer from product and audience: B2B SaaS direct and confident, consumer apps warmer, developer tools terse and honest. Ask for brand guidelines or a tone-of-voice doc alongside the draft, not instead of it.

Note the inferred voice in the brief.

Step 4: Choose framework and load references

Load references/frameworks.md, plus references/page-types.md when the target is a homepage, landing, pricing, feature, or about page. Choose the primary framework from the brief:

| Situation | Lead framework | |-----------|---------------| | Cold traffic, unfamiliar product | Why/How/What (Simon Sinek) | | Feature-heavy product | Benefit Not Feature | | High-trust audience, low awareness | Show Don't Tell | | Transactional page, known intent | CTA Clarity | | Long-form sales page | Problem → Agitate → Solution (PAS) |

Layer frameworks freely. Why/How/What almost always applies to hero copy.

Step 5: Write 2-3 alternatives

Write exactly 2-3 distinct alternatives, labeled Option A, Option B, Option C. Each must:

• Apply the chosen framework visibly
• Lead with Why, not What
• Use no banned words (see below)
• Include a headline, subhead, and at least one CTA
• Be structurally different, not the same idea with new adjectives

Step 6: Recommend and explain

Pick one; state which and why in one sentence. For each unpicked option, give one specific edit note: what would make it stronger.

Step 7: Verify every line before handing back

Check each line of every option: leads with Why, names a concrete outcome, no banned word, no em dash as ordinary punctuation. New copy containing a banned word is not an option to present; rewrite it first.

---

Mode B: Editing existing copy

Editing progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Read all copy-bearing files
- [ ] Step 2: Set the north star
- [ ] Step 3: Audit against persuasion frameworks
- [ ] Step 4: Remove AI writing patterns
- [ ] Step 5: Run seven sweeps
- [ ] Step 6: Flag weakest elements with labels
- [ ] Step 7: Rewrite flagged sections
- [ ] Step 8: Output before/after diff

Step 1: Read all copy-bearing files

Scan every reader-facing surface: README headers, landing components, hero, CTAs, product descriptions, feature lists, onboarding strings, meta descriptions, email subjects. Ask which files if unclear; never audit copy you haven't read in context.

Step 2: Set the north star

Write one sentence before auditing: "[User] can now [do X] without [old pain]." Every flag and rewrite serves it. If you can't write it confidently, ask; the copy is unfixable until the value proposition is clear.

Step 3: Audit against persuasion frameworks

Load references/frameworks.md. Check every major copy block against each framework, and carry forward only the highest-impact problems; Step 6 sets the flag budget.

Step 4: Remove AI writing patterns

Load references/word-lists.md and references/ai-patterns.md. Flag each AI-ism with [AI-ISM] plus its pattern type:

• Tier 1 words (word-lists.md): always flag and replace.
• Tier 2 clusters (word-lists.md): flag when 2+ appear in one paragraph.
• Structural patterns (ai-patterns.md): formulaic openings, chatbot artefacts, "let's" transitions, significance inflation, copula avoidance, em dashes as ordinary punctuation.

The em dash and its -- substitute are Tier 1 tells in their own right; ai-patterns.md section 1 holds the threshold, section 7 the P0/P1/P2 triage.

Skip for persuasion-only edits. If the user asked for AI pattern removal, run this first, before the sweeps.

Step 5: Run seven sweeps

Load references/sweeps.md; run all seven in order. Each targets a distinct failure mode; don't skip any because copy "looks fine".

Step 6: Flag weakest elements

Attach a label inline to every weak line. Use exactly these labels:

| Label | Meaning | |-------|---------| | [WHAT-NOT-WHY] | Leads with product/feature, not user motivation | | [FEATURE-NOT-BENEFIT] | Describes what the product has, not what changes for the user | | [TELL-NOT-SHOW] | Adjective claim without proof ("powerful", "seamless", "easy") | | [VAGUE] | Generic; could describe any product in the category | | [PASSIVE] | Subject is acted upon instead of acting | | [VOICE-DRIFT] | Breaks from the dominant voice of the surrounding copy (register, tense, or person) | | [PAIN-NOT-NAMED] | States benefits without naming the frustration the reader arrived with | | [DEAD-WEIGHT] | Adds nothing not already conveyed; safe to cut | | [JARGON] | Technical term that obscures meaning for non-experts | | [NO-PROOF] | Claim needing a number, example, or testimonial | | [WEAK-CTA] | CTA describes the action, not the outcome | | [STATE-COPY] | Vague, leaky, or dead-end state string (error, success, empty, loading, permission), or a destructive CTA labeled "Confirm"/"OK"/bare verb (see references/ui-states.md for rule IDs) | | [AI-ISM] | AI writing pattern: Tier 1 word, Tier 2 cluster, or structural tell |

Flag the 3-7 weakest elements, prioritised by impact on conversion or comprehension.

Step 7: Rewrite flagged sections

• Cut hard: a block that reads as already-tight usually isn't. Same meaning in half the words.
• Lead with Why (the user's problem or desire), not What (the product).
• Name the concrete outcome, not the capability.
• Replace adjectives with proof: "powerful analytics" becomes "see which pages kill signups".
• Make CTAs outcome-specific: "Start syncing" beats "Get started".
• Every sentence adds new information or gets cut.
• A CTA stays short; it is not the place to explain the feature.
• When replacing AI-isms, rewrite the sentence; don't swap the flagged word for a synonym.

Step 8: Output before/after diff

## Copy Audit: [file or component name]

**North star:** [one-sentence value prop]

---

### [Section name]

**Before:**
> [original text]

**Issues:** `[LABEL]`, `[LABEL]`

**After:**
> [rewritten text]

**Why:** [one sentence explaining the change]

---

### Summary
- N issues flagged across N sections
- Top pattern: [most common label]
- Confidence: [high / medium; note if copy context was limited]

Verify each "After" line before handing back: leads with Why, names a concrete outcome, no banned word, no em dash as ordinary punctuation. A rewrite that reintroduces an AI tell is a regression.

---

Banned words

The never-write set. Applies in both modes, no exceptions, so it lives here rather than behind a reference load:

delve, leverage (verb), robust, seamless, holistic, paradigm, game-changing, cutting-edge, innovative, synergy, revolutionary, effortless, world-class, powerful

Also ban "simple" as a claim ("our simple onboarding"): never earned upfront, reads as an unkept promise.

references/word-lists.md holds the wider tiered AI vocabulary with replacements; that list is for detection in Edit mode, not a second copy of this one.

---

Gotchas

• State the brief before writing and mark what you inferred: copy written without a goal and value proposition reads well and solves the wrong problem.
• Edit mode: flag only the 3-7 highest-impact issues; over-flagging dilutes the audit into a list nobody acts on.
• Read copy in context before judging; a vague-looking line may carry contrast with adjacent copy.
• Preserve the project's locale and brand voice; check existing copy before switching spelling or tone. A US-spelling rewrite on an en-AU product ships as a regression across every string it touches.

---

Skill handoffs

| When | Run | |------|-----| | After rewriting technical documentation copy | docs-writing | | To optimise meta descriptions and page titles | optimise-seo | | To review the full UI including copy in context | ui-audit | | Landing page visual design, CRO strategy, conversion benchmarks | ui-design (marketing track) | | The product decision of which action exists and its scope and consequence | product-design |