sharkitect-solutions/email-draft-polish

Email Draft Polish

File Index

| File | Purpose | Required | |------|---------|----------| | brand/Lead Gen Email Agent Brief.md | Complete ruleset -- authoritative source | YES -- load before reviewing | | brand/templates/[niche].md | Niche-specific pain points, terminology, golden examples | YES -- load matching niche |

If brand brief is missing: Stop and ask the user to provide it. Do not proceed without it. Every rule in this skill is derived from that document -- QA without it is guesswork.

---

Rationalization Table

These are the excuses Claude (or the user) might use to skip a thorough QA pass. None of them are valid.

| Rationalization | Why It Fails | |----------------|-------------| | "The email looks good enough" | "Good enough" sends the wrong impression to cold prospects. One AI tell-tale tanks deliverability and reply rates. | | "This is just a follow-up, less scrutiny needed" | Follow-ups have their own specific structural requirements. FU2 and FU3 especially require trust signals that are easy to miss. | | "The user already approved the template" | Approving a template structure is not approving a specific draft. Each draft requires its own pass. | | "It's close enough to the brand voice" | "Close enough" accumulates. A slightly salesy tone plus a slightly formal opener plus one marketing buzzword = an email that reads as AI-generated. | | "The checklist doesn't apply to this niche" | The checklist applies to all niches. Niche-specific items are additive, not replacements. | | "The user said they just want light polish" | Light polish still requires flagging hard rule violations. Mention all failures; let the user decide what to fix. | | "This email already performed well before" | Past performance on a different draft in a different niche with a different prospect is not a pass on this one. |

---

NEVER

• NEVER approve an email that contains AI tell-tales. Phrases like "I hope this finds you well," "In today's competitive landscape," or "I wanted to reach out" are disqualifying -- rewrite, do not approve.
• NEVER let "call" or "phone" slip through. The consultation is in-person only. A single wrong word here breaks the entire offer framing.
• NEVER skip the brand brief. Every rule in this skill has additional context in the brief. Reviewing without it means missing niche-specific exceptions and requirements.
• NEVER approve a draft with solution-selling language. Describing what Sharkitect does, how AI works, or what the engagement includes violates the core premise of the email (diagnostic framing, not sales pitch).
• NEVER assume the follow-up type. Confirm whether the draft is initial, FU1, FU2, FU3, or FU4 before applying the checklist. Each type has different requirements.
• NEVER skip the deliverability check. A brilliant email that hits a spam filter has a 0% reply rate. Deliverability is not optional.
• NEVER present a pass without checking every item. Rushing the checklist produces false confidence and sends broken emails.

---

Before Reviewing

Step 1 -- Identify the email type: Confirm: initial, FU1, FU2, FU3, or FU4. This determines which sections of the checklist apply.

Step 2 -- Load the brand brief: Read brand/Lead Gen Email Agent Brief.md. This is the authoritative source. When in doubt, the brief wins.

Step 3 -- Load the niche template: Read brand/templates/[niche].md for niche-specific context (industry pain points, terminology, golden examples).

---

Review Checklist

1. Structure Check

• [ ] Word count: 80-120 words for initial emails (body only, excluding signature)
• [ ] Opener: Starts with a universal truth or grounded daily reality -- NOT "I hope this finds you well," NOT a compliment, NOT a question
• [ ] Two "Maybe it's..." scenarios: Specific, plausible examples of system leaks relevant to the niche
• [ ] Pattern interrupt: One-line pivot ("The leak wasn't where they thought it was." or similar)
• [ ] Diagnostic framing: Names the 45-Minute [Niche] Systems Consultation with correct niche-specific name
• [ ] CTA: Direct ask with form link placeholder ({{CTA}}), no opt-out language (except FU4)
• [ ] Signature: 5-line block (Christopher Sharkey / Founder & Owner / Sharkitect Digital / Your AI Transformation Partner / www.sharkitectdigital.com)

2. Voice Check

Target voice equation: 40% Confident Expert + 25% Friendly Neighbor + 20% Straight Shooter + 15% Curious Diagnostician.

• [ ] Reads like a human wrote it (read aloud test)
• [ ] Conversational but professional -- contractions OK, slang not OK
• [ ] No marketing jargon ("leverage," "synergy," "best-in-class," "cutting-edge")
• [ ] No emojis
• [ ] No markdown formatting (no bold, no links, no bullet points in the email body)
• [ ] No exclamation marks (or at most one, used sparingly)
• [ ] Confident but not arrogant -- peer tone, not vendor tone

3. Content Guardrails

• [ ] No solution-selling: Does NOT describe what Sharkitect does, how AI works, or what the partnership includes
• [ ] No assumed pain points: "Maybe it's..." framing (speculative), never "You're losing money because..."
• [ ] No case studies in first contact: No "We helped Company X achieve Y" in the initial email
• [ ] No specific company references: Does not mention the prospect's website, reviews, or anything that signals scraping
• [ ] No "AI" or "automation" language: The email is from a person, not a technology pitch
• [ ] Consultation is IN-PERSON: Never references a "call," "phone consultation," or "virtual meeting" -- it's an in-person consultation
• [ ] No opt-out in initial/FU1/FU2/FU3: Only FU4 (breakup) may offer exit language

4. Follow-Up Specific Checks

FU1 (Education):

• [ ] Addresses objection #2 ("Things are fine") by showing invisible leaks
• [ ] Adds new value -- industry insight, stat, or educational angle
• [ ] Does NOT repeat the initial email's content

FU2 (Trust/Proof):

• [ ] Addresses objections #3 ("Burned before") and #4 ("Sales pitch")
• [ ] Uses negative proof (turned down revenue, told someone not to change) or honesty signal
• [ ] Builds trust without being salesy

FU3 (Objection-Buster):

• [ ] Addresses objections #1 ("No time") and #5 ("Can't afford next step")
• [ ] Acknowledges they're busy (empathy, not guilt)
• [ ] Restates low friction: "45 minutes. No pitch. No charge."
• [ ] Direct CTA, still no opt-out

FU4 (Clean Breakup):

• [ ] Short -- under 60 words
• [ ] "This is my last note" or similar
• [ ] May offer exit: "If timing's off, no worries"
• [ ] Restates offer ONE final time briefly
• [ ] No hard sell, no guilt, no "you're missing out"

5. Deliverability Check

• [ ] No HTML formatting
• [ ] No images or embedded content
• [ ] Single link only (the CTA form link)
• [ ] No spam trigger words ("free" in subject, "act now," "limited time," "guaranteed")
• [ ] Subject line: 2-6 words, lowercase, looks internal/personal
• [ ] No ALL CAPS words
• [ ] No excessive punctuation (!!!, ???, ...)

---

Red Flags

Observable patterns that indicate this skill is being violated or the email has a serious problem.

• AI tell-tale phrase detected -- "I hope this," "I wanted to reach out," "In today's landscape," or any phrase that appears in the AI-Generated Tell-Tales list below. Hard stop.
• Word "call" or "phone" appears in body -- Consultation is in-person. Any reference to a call violates the offer framing.
• Draft describes Sharkitect's services or AI -- Solution-selling. The email should create curiosity, not pitch a product.
• Opener is a question -- Questions as openers are a documented AI pattern. They also put the reader on defense. Flag and rewrite.
• Only one "Maybe it's..." scenario -- The structure requires two. One scenario reads as thin and unconvincing.
• Signature is incomplete or wrong order -- Any deviation from the 5-line block breaks brand consistency.
• Subject line is more than 6 words or contains caps -- Deliverability risk and looks promotional rather than personal.
• Opt-out language in initial, FU1, FU2, or FU3 -- Exit language belongs only in FU4. Including it earlier signals low confidence and reduces response urgency.
• Word count outside 80-120 for initial emails -- Under 80 reads as dismissive; over 120 loses attention. Both reduce reply probability.
• Follow-up repeats initial email content -- FU1 through FU4 must add new value. Repetition signals that you have nothing new to say.

---

Common Failures to Watch For

AI-Generated Tell-Tales

These patterns immediately signal "AI wrote this" -- flag and rewrite:

• "I hope this email finds you well"
• "I came across your company and was impressed"
• "In today's competitive landscape"
• "I wanted to reach out because"
• "Allow me to introduce"
• Starting with a question ("Are you struggling with...?")
• Lists of three with parallel structure (feels templated)
• Ending with "Looking forward to hearing from you"

Tone Drift

• Too formal: "I would like to propose an opportunity" -> sounds like a bank
• Too casual: "Hey! Quick question for ya" -> sounds like spam
• Too salesy: "We help companies like yours increase revenue by..." -> vendor pitch
• Too vague: "Many businesses face challenges" -> says nothing specific

Structure Violations

• Missing the pattern interrupt line
• Only one "Maybe it's..." scenario (need two)
• CTA buried in the middle instead of near the end
• Signature missing a line or in wrong order
• Lead magnet named incorrectly (e.g., "free consultation" instead of "The 45-Minute HVAC Systems Consultation")

---

Revision Process

When an email fails any check:

1. Identify which specific checks failed
2. Explain why it matters (deliverability risk? brand violation? reduced reply rate?)
3. Rewrite the failing section with a corrected version
4. Re-check the full email after revision to ensure fixes didn't introduce new issues

Present revisions as before/after pairs so the change is clear.