email-deliverability
Skill0 starsChanged 39 days agoMITView on GitHub
Audits and protects sender reputation and inbox placement for permissioned marketing and lifecycle email - SPF, DKIM, and DMARC authentication, domain warmup, bounce and complaint thresholds, and engagement sunsetting - and delivers a scored deliverability audit checklist with a remediation order. Use when someone asks "why are my newsletters going to spam", "how do I set up SPF, DKIM, and DMARC", "is my bounce rate too high", "should I send marketing from a subdomain", or is launching a new sending domain or auditing an existing opted-in email program. Do NOT use for cold outbound infrastructure - lookalike sending domains, mailbox pools, per-mailbox volume caps - use cold-email-deliverability instead; do NOT use to write the emails themselves - use email-drip-builder or email-newsletter-pro instead.
8 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Littlpinguin/marketing-cockpit-templatetheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- vijaysuperpositionist/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- brainbytes-dev/everything-claude-marketingtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- astDeniss/business-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- NadavShanun-design/opengtmtheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- email-marketing-skills/email-marketing-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 8
- the-nam-shub/e5-real-skills★ 10same name
- brainbytes-dev/everything-claude-marketing★ 9same name
- Littlpinguin/marketing-cockpit-template★ 9same name
- astDeniss/business-skills★ 8same name
- NadavShanun-design/opengtm★ 4same name
- email-marketing-skills/email-marketing-skills★ 1same name
- 2867203296/hermes-agent★ 0same name
- vijaysuperpositionist/skills★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- churn-reductionSkill
- email-drip-builderSkill
- email-newsletter-proSkill
- lifecycle-journey-mapSkill
- push-notification-copySkill
- segmentation-strategySkill
- win-back-campaignSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
8
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 47
No purchased or scraped addresses in any segment, ever.
- Distinctive: line 103
Do not retry hard bounces - the address does not exist, and repeated attempts signal poor hygiene to providers.
- Distinctive: line 104
Do not leave DMARC at p=none past the monitoring window - it reports failures but blocks nothing.
- Distinctive: line 105
Do not blast a re-permission campaign to the entire stale segment at once.
- Distinctive: line 106
Do not send marketing and transactional mail from the same identity - one bad campaign then delays password resets.
- Distinctive: line 107
Do not treat deliverability as one-time configuration.
- Distinctive: line 108
Do not confuse this with cold outbound.
- Distinctive: line 112
Every metric in the audit is pulled from the ESP or Postmaster Tools, not estimated.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Email Deliverability
Sender reputation takes months to build and days to destroy, and most teams discover a deliverability problem only after open rates have already cratered. This skill audits and protects inbox placement for permissioned marketing and lifecycle email - authentication, warmup, list hygiene, and engagement - and returns a scored audit with fixes in dependency order. It exists to catch the silent killers (an unenforced DMARC policy, a stale segment, a skipped warmup) before an inbox provider does.
Operating procedure
Work the steps in order: authentication failures poison every downstream metric, so fix identity before hygiene, and hygiene before engagement.
Step 1: Gather inputs
Collect these before auditing anything. If a number is estimated, label it a guess and verify against the ESP dashboard before the audit ships.
- Sending domain(s), and whether marketing and transactional mail share one identity.
- ESP(s) in use; shared or dedicated sending IP.
- List size, acquisition sources (signup form, import, purchase - a purchased source is an automatic red flag), and list age.
- Last 30 days of: delivered volume, hard and soft bounce rates, spam complaint rate, open and click rates by segment.
- Google Postmaster Tools access. If the domain is not enrolled, enrolling is the first remediation item - it is the only direct view of how Gmail scores the domain.
- DMARC report destination, if one exists.
Step 2: Verify authentication by DNS lookup, not by the ESP settings screen
SPF, DKIM, and DMARC are not optional; Gmail and Yahoo bulk-sender requirements effectively mandate all three plus one-click unsubscribe.
- SPF: exactly one v=spf1 TXT record (two records is a permerror and silently fails), ending in ~all or -all. SPF declares which servers may send on the domain's behalf.
- DKIM: cryptographically signs each message; confirm every marketing send is signed.
- DMARC: tells receivers what to do with unauthenticated mail and where to send reports. Ramp the policy: start at p=none to monitor, move to p=quarantine within 30 days of launch, and p=reject within 90 days once aggregate reports confirm no legitimate mail is failing. A p=none policy left in place indefinitely is monitoring without protection.
Step 3: Separate mail streams
Send marketing from a dedicated subdomain (mail.example.com, not example.com) configured as a distinct sending identity with its own SPF and DKIM records. This insulates transactional mail - receipts, password resets - from reputation damage caused by campaigns. If both streams share one identity today, flag it as a structural finding.
Step 4: Warm up anything new
A new IP or domain has no sending history. Start at 200 to 500 sends per day, doubling volume every three to five days while watching bounce and complaint rates. Skipping warmup gets the domain blocked before the list has been reached. Use a structured warmup plan from the ESP or a dedicated warmup tool, and keep weekly volume consistent afterward - 10x spikes look like a compromised account.
Step 5: Audit list hygiene against hard thresholds
- Hard bounce rate below 0.5 percent. A hard bounce means the address does not exist; remove it immediately and automatically after the first occurrence, and never retry it.
- Total bounce rate above 2 percent is a list-quality emergency: pause sends to the offending acquisition source and re-verify the segment before resuming.
- No purchased or scraped addresses in any segment, ever.
Step 6: Check complaints and engagement
- Spam complaint rate below 0.1 percent on every segment - that is the threshold at which most major inbox providers begin filtering, and Gmail's enforcement red line sits at 0.3 percent. A spike above 0.1 percent requires pausing sends, auditing the segment, and diagnosing the cause before resuming.
- Sender Score (Validity) of 80 or above is healthy; below 70, expect filtering and cut volume while diagnosing.
- Sunset unengaged subscribers: anyone with no open or click in 180 days drags down the engagement signals providers use to score quality. Run a re-permission campaign before the 180-day mark and suppress non-responders. A smaller, engaged list consistently outperforms a large, stale one.
Step 7: Score the audit and order the fixes
Complete the checklist below, mark each item pass or fail, and order remediation by dependency: authentication, then stream separation, then hygiene, then complaints, then engagement.
Worked artifact: deliverability audit checklist
DELIVERABILITY AUDIT - [FILL: domain] - [FILL: auditor]
AUTHENTICATION
[ ] Exactly ONE SPF (v=spf1) TXT record, ending ~all or -all
[ ] DKIM signing verified on every marketing send
[ ] DMARC published at p=quarantine or p=reject
(p=none acceptable only during initial monitoring window)
[ ] DMARC rua= reporting address set and reports reviewed
STREAM SEPARATION
[ ] Marketing sends from a dedicated subdomain (e.g. mail.example.com)
[ ] Subdomain has its own SPF and DKIM records
[ ] Transactional mail isolated on a separate identity
VOLUME & WARMUP
[ ] New domain/IP warmed from 200-500/day, doubling every 3-5 days
[ ] Weekly volume consistent - no unexplained spikes
LIST HYGIENE
[ ] Hard bounce rate < 0.5%; hard bounces suppressed after first occurrence
[ ] Total bounce rate < 2% on every segment
[ ] No purchased or scraped addresses; acquisition source recorded per subscriber
COMPLAINTS & ENGAGEMENT
[ ] Spam complaint rate < 0.1% on every segment
[ ] Google Postmaster Tools enrolled; domain reputation Medium or High
[ ] One-click unsubscribe (List-Unsubscribe header) present
[ ] 180-day unengaged segment identified; re-permission campaign scheduled
[ ] Sunset policy suppresses non-responders automatically
VERDICT: [FILL: healthy / at risk / failing]
TOP 3 FIXES IN ORDER: [FILL]
RE-CHECK IN 30 DAYS: [FILL: the 2-3 metrics to re-measure]Deliverable
Produce the completed audit checklist plus a remediation plan: every failed item, its fix, an owner, and the dependency order - with the two or three metrics to re-measure 30 days later.
Do NOT
- Do not retry hard bounces - the address does not exist, and repeated attempts signal poor hygiene to providers.
- Do not leave DMARC at p=none past the monitoring window - it reports failures but blocks nothing.
- Do not blast a re-permission campaign to the entire stale segment at once; send it in slices so a complaint spike from the least-engaged cohort cannot torch the domain.
- Do not send marketing and transactional mail from the same identity - one bad campaign then delays password resets.
- Do not treat deliverability as one-time configuration; complaint and reputation data need a standing review cadence.
- Do not confuse this with cold outbound. Cold sending uses separate lookalike domains and per-mailbox caps precisely because it is expected to burn identities - those rules live in cold-email-deliverability.
Quality bar
- Every metric in the audit is pulled from the ESP or Postmaster Tools, not estimated; any guess is labeled as a guess.
- Authentication verified by actual DNS lookup, not the ESP's green checkmark.
- The verdict cites the numbers against the thresholds (0.5% hard bounce, 2% total bounce, 0.1% complaints, DMARC enforcement state).
- Remediation is ordered by dependency and every item has an owner.
Scope and escalation
This skill covers permissioned marketing and lifecycle sending from the brand's own domain. For cold outbound infrastructure, use cold-email-deliverability. For sequence content, use email-drip-builder; for newsletter craft, email-newsletter-pro; for re-engaging lapsed customers as a campaign, win-back-campaign. If the domain is on public blocklists or under a provider enforcement action, treat recovery as its own project: cut volume to the most-engaged decile and rebuild slowly rather than sending through the damage.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

