marketing-copywriting
Writes and edits marketing copy for any surface — homepage, product and pricing pages, ads, emails, and collateral — and sharpens existing copy that is not working. Use this to write or rewrite page copy, tighten a draft, fix copy that is vague or feature-led, adapt one message a
Install
npx skills add https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount/tree/main/plugins/marketing/skills/marketing-copywriting
claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install cbrock84-headcount@llmmart
git clone https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount.git
The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole cbrock84/headcount collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.
Skill manifest
Marketing copywriting
Before writing a word
Settle four things. Copy written without them is decoration:
- Who is reading, and what they already believe.
- What one thing they should understand afterward.
- What they should do, singular.
- What is stopping them — the actual objection, not the polite version.
Writing
Lead with the consequence, not the mechanism. People buy what a thing lets them do. The feature is evidence for the claim, not the claim.
Specific beats superlative, always. "Cuts invoice processing from three days to twenty minutes" outperforms "dramatically faster" because it can be believed and checked. Every superlative is a claim your competitor also makes.
Write the way the reader talks. Their words, from research or support tickets, not internal vocabulary. If a phrase only exists inside the company, it does not go on the page.
One idea per section, in the reader's order — problem they recognize, why existing options fail, what you do differently, proof, what to do next. Not your org chart's order.
Every claim carries proof nearby: a number, a name, a screenshot, a quote. A page of unbacked claims reads as marketing and is discounted wholesale.
Editing
Edit in passes; doing them at once does none of them.
- Structure — is the order right, and is anything missing or duplicated? Fix this before sentences.
- Cut — remove every sentence that does not advance the argument. Then cut the first paragraph, which is usually warm-up.
- Sharpen — replace abstractions with specifics, passive with active, hedges with claims.
- Read aloud — anything you stumble over gets rewritten. This catches what silent reading does not.
Kill on sight
Empty openers ("In today's fast-paced world"), we-focused framing where you-focused works, hedges that weaken a true claim, feature lists with no consequence attached, and any adjective a competitor could equally use.
Sources
references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions
here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before
answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free
to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.
Never
- Write before you know what the reader should do next.
- Edit for elegance before the argument is right. Polished copy for the wrong claim is the more expensive mistake.
- Approve copy nobody read aloud. Rhythm problems are inaudible on the page.
Files (headcount)
-
references
-
sources.md 1.7 KB
# Sources — `marketing:marketing-copywriting` <!-- Generated by scripts/build-sources.py from sources/*.toml. Do not edit. --> Check these before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. The use note on each one is binding: most of what a professional cites is free to read and not free to reproduce. ## .com Disclosures: How to Make Effective Disclosures in Digital Advertising US Federal Trade Commission · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely <https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/com-disclosures-how-make-effective-disclosures-digital-advertising> **Authoritative for:** What 'clear and conspicuous' means on a screen — proximity, hyperlinks, scrolling, pop-ups, and space-constrained formats. ## Guides Against Deceptive Pricing, 16 CFR 233 US Federal Trade Commission · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely <https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-233> **Authoritative for:** Whether a 'was $X, now $Y', list-price, free-offer or percentage-off claim is lawful as presented. ## Policy Statement Regarding Advertising Substantiation US Federal Trade Commission · US · public domain (US government) — quote freely <https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/ftc-policy-statement-regarding-advertising-substantiation> **Authoritative for:** What evidence you must already hold before making an objective claim. This is the document that answers whether you may say 'number one', 'three times faster' or 'clinically proven'. --- Sources are maintained in `sources/` upstream, not here. If one is wrong, out of date, or missing, fix it there — this file is regenerated and an edit to it is lost.
-
-
SKILL.md 2.9 KB
--- name: marketing-copywriting description: Writes and edits marketing copy for any surface — homepage, product and pricing pages, ads, emails, and collateral — and sharpens existing copy that is not working. Use this to write or rewrite page copy, tighten a draft, fix copy that is vague or feature-led, adapt one message across formats, or review copy before it ships. --- # Marketing copywriting ## Before writing a word Settle four things. Copy written without them is decoration: - **Who** is reading, and what they already believe. - **What one thing** they should understand afterward. - **What they should do**, singular. - **What is stopping them** — the actual objection, not the polite version. ## Writing **Lead with the consequence, not the mechanism.** People buy what a thing lets them do. The feature is evidence for the claim, not the claim. **Specific beats superlative, always.** "Cuts invoice processing from three days to twenty minutes" outperforms "dramatically faster" because it can be believed and checked. Every superlative is a claim your competitor also makes. **Write the way the reader talks.** Their words, from research or support tickets, not internal vocabulary. If a phrase only exists inside the company, it does not go on the page. **One idea per section, in the reader's order** — problem they recognize, why existing options fail, what you do differently, proof, what to do next. Not your org chart's order. **Every claim carries proof** nearby: a number, a name, a screenshot, a quote. A page of unbacked claims reads as marketing and is discounted wholesale. ## Editing Edit in passes; doing them at once does none of them. 1. **Structure** — is the order right, and is anything missing or duplicated? Fix this before sentences. 2. **Cut** — remove every sentence that does not advance the argument. Then cut the first paragraph, which is usually warm-up. 3. **Sharpen** — replace abstractions with specifics, passive with active, hedges with claims. 4. **Read aloud** — anything you stumble over gets rewritten. This catches what silent reading does not. ## Kill on sight Empty openers ("In today's fast-paced world"), we-focused framing where you-focused works, hedges that weaken a true claim, feature lists with no consequence attached, and any adjective a competitor could equally use. ## Sources `references/sources.md` in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding. ## Never - Write before you know what the reader should do next. - Edit for elegance before the argument is right. Polished copy for the wrong claim is the more expensive mistake. - Approve copy nobody read aloud. Rhythm problems are inaudible on the page.
Comments (0)
Sign in to join the conversation.
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet.
No comments yet.