guarantee-writer
Skill32 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Generate risk-reversal guarantees that convert fence-sitters — money-back, conditional, better-than-money-back, double-your-money, and performance-based with headline, terms, and visual treatment using RMBC principles.
1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Zenobia0000/dtc-copywriting-skillsedited, first seen Mar 20, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- Zenobia0000/dtc-copywriting-skills★ 463% same
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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 repository41 other files it gives its agents.
- ab-test-planSkill
- ad-angle-generatorSkill
- ad-creative-auditSkill
- advertorial-writerSkill
- bonus-stackSkill
- broadcast-emailSkill
- cart-abandonment-flowSkill
- checkout-abandonmentSkill
- competitor-offer-analysisSkill
- copy-rewriteSkill
- creative-briefSkill
- email-promoSkill
- email-retention-sequencesSkill
- fb-ad-copySkill
- free-offer-briefSkill
- funnel-architectureSkill
- funnel-auditSkill
- hook-batterySkill
- ingredient-researchSkill
- lander-copySkill
- lead-writerSkill
- mechanism-ideationSkill
- media-buying-briefSkill
- offer-stackSkill
- order-form-croSkill
- pdp-ecomm-templateSkill
- post-purchase-sequenceSkill
- pricing-strategySkill
- reengagement-sequenceSkill
- rmbc-contextSkill
- rmbc-copy-auditSkill
- scarcity-urgencySkill
- soap-opera-sequenceSkill
- thank-you-pageSkill
- ugc-briefSkill
- unified-research-synthesizerSkill
- upsell-scriptSkill
- upsell-sequence-writerSkill
- vsl-scriptSkill
- webinar-registration-copySkill
- welcome-sequenceSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 32
Before writing, understand what's actually at stake for the buyer:
- Distinctive: line 71
If it doesn't work, buyer gets 2x their purchase price refunded.
- Distinctive: line 154
Every guarantee must have a name — unnamed guarantees feel generic and forgettable
- Distinctive: line 162
Specificity gate: Every claim in the copy must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "get results" or "improve your business"
- Distinctive: line 163
Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)
- Distinctive: line 165
Proof diversity: Use at least 2 different proof types (testimonial, statistical, authority, case study) — do not rely on a single proof mode
- Very specific: line 170
Run /offer-stack to integrate the guarantee into the full offer architecture
- Very specific: line 171
Run /order-form-cro to place the guarantee optimally on the checkout page
- Very specific: line 172
Run /lander-copy for the sales page that presents the guarantee
- Very specific: line 173
Run /ab-test-plan to test guarantee variations against each other
- Very specific: line 174
Run /checkout-abandonment to diagnose if weak guarantee copy is causing drop-off
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
guarantee-writer
Purpose
Generate risk-reversal guarantees that convert fence-sitters into buyers. The guarantee is the most underrated conversion element in direct response — it doesn't just reduce risk, it demonstrates confidence in your mechanism. A strong guarantee says "we believe in our [mechanism] so much that we'll put our money where our mouth is." This skill produces 3 guarantee options across different types, each with a headline, terms, visual treatment suggestion, and copy ready for the checkout page, sales page, and email.
Inputs
| Input | Required | Description |
product_name | Yes | Product name and brief description of what it delivers |
price_point | Yes | Price — affects guarantee framing (higher price = stronger guarantee needed) |
guarantee_type | Yes | One of: money_back, conditional, better_than_money_back, double_money_back, performance_based, or all to generate one of each |
guarantee_duration | Yes | How long the guarantee lasts: 30, 60, 90, 365 days, or lifetime |
target_audience | Yes | Who the buyer is — their risk tolerance, sophistication, past experiences with guarantees |
Execution Protocol
Step 1 — Load Framework Context
Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions. The guarantee is a Mechanism expression — it proves you believe in your own "why it works" story. Research reveals what risks the audience fears most. The Brief determines how aggressively to position the guarantee. Copy executes the guarantee language to feel confident, not defensive.
Step 2 — Diagnose the Risk Profile
Before writing, understand what's actually at stake for the buyer:
| Risk Type | Question | Impact on Guarantee |
| Financial | Can they afford to lose this money? | Higher price = longer duration, stronger terms |
| Results | Do they believe the product will work? | Results skepticism = conditional or performance guarantee |
| Trust | Do they trust the company to honor the guarantee? | Low trust = simple process, no fine print, well-known payment processor |
| Effort | Will they have to work hard to get a refund? | Friction fear = "no questions asked" + clear process |
| Social | Will they feel foolish if it doesn't work? | Ego risk = frame guarantee as "smart insurance" not "safety net" |
Step 3 — Generate Guarantee Options
For each requested type (or all 5 if all selected):
Type 1: Money-Back Guarantee
The standard. Simple, clear, no conditions.
- Best for: First-time buyers, lower price points, building initial trust
- Headline pattern: "The [Duration] No-Questions-Asked Guarantee"
- Key copy element: Emphasize the process simplicity — "Email us, get your money back. Period."
- Risk to seller: Highest refund rate but highest conversion lift
- Duration guidance: Match to time needed to see results (minimum 30 days)
Type 2: Conditional Guarantee
Refund if the buyer follows the program/uses the product AND doesn't get results.
- Best for: Courses, coaching, programs where effort matters
- Headline pattern: "The [Product/Method Name] Promise"
- Key copy element: Name the conditions clearly — "Use [system] for [X] days, do [specific actions], and if you don't [outcome]..."
- Risk to seller: Lower refund rate (conditions filter tire-kickers), slightly lower conversion lift
- Duration guidance: Conditions period + buffer (if 30-day program, offer 60-day guarantee)
Type 3: Better-Than-Money-Back
Buyer keeps something valuable AND gets a full refund.
- Best for: High-confidence offers, products with low-cost bonuses
- Headline pattern: "The Keep-Everything Guarantee"
- Key copy element: Name what they keep — "Even if you want a refund, keep [Bonus X] as our gift"
- Risk to seller: Same refund cost plus bonus fulfillment, but very high conversion lift
- Duration guidance: Same as money-back; the bonus retention is the differentiator
Type 4: Double-Your-Money-Back
If it doesn't work, buyer gets 2x their purchase price refunded.
- Best for: Ultra-high-confidence offers, market disruption, attention-grabbing
- Headline pattern: "The Double-Your-Money [Outcome] Guarantee"
- Key copy element: Make the math explicit — "Pay $97 today. If [product] doesn't [outcome], we send you $194."
- Risk to seller: Highest financial exposure; only use with proven product and low refund history
- Duration guidance: Typically shorter (30-60 days) to limit exposure window
Type 5: Performance-Based Guarantee
Tied to a specific, measurable result.
- Best for: Services, B2B, results-based offerings
- Headline pattern: "The [Specific Number] Guarantee"
- Key copy element: Name the exact metric — "If your [metric] doesn't improve by [X%] in [timeframe], we [refund/credit/compensate]"
- Risk to seller: Moderate — tied to measurable outcome, requires tracking
- Duration guidance: Match to realistic results timeline for the service
Step 4 — Write Each Guarantee
For each guarantee, produce three versions:
Sales Page Version (3-5 sentences): Full guarantee with headline, named guarantee, terms, and process.
Checkout Version (1-2 sentences): Compressed guarantee placed near the payment button. Must build confidence in minimal space.
Email Version (2-3 sentences): Guarantee copy for follow-up emails to non-buyers. Emphasize the risk-free nature of trying.
Step 5 — Visual Treatment
For each guarantee, suggest:
- Badge/seal design: Shape, color, key text on the badge
- Placement: Where on the page the guarantee should appear (near CTA, in sidebar, above fold)
- Typography: What to bold, what size relative to body copy
Output Format
## Guarantee Options: [Product Name]
**Price:** [price]
**Duration:** [duration]
**Audience Risk Profile:** [1-line summary of primary risk type]
---
### OPTION 1: [Guarantee Name] ([Type])
**Headline:** "[Guarantee headline]"
**Sales Page Copy:**
[3-5 sentence guarantee copy]
**Checkout Copy:**
[1-2 sentence compressed version]
**Email Copy:**
[2-3 sentence version for follow-up emails]
**Visual Treatment:**
- Badge: [shape, color, text]
- Placement: [where on page]
- Typography: [what to emphasize]
**Conversion impact:** [expected effect on conversion and refund rate]
---
### OPTION 2: [Same format]
---
### OPTION 3: [Same format]
---
### RECOMMENDATION
**Best option for this product:** [Option #] because [reason tied to audience risk profile and price point].
**Test against:** [Option #] — run as A/B test to validate.Quality Criteria
- Every guarantee must have a name — unnamed guarantees feel generic and forgettable
- Terms must be specific about duration, process, and any conditions — ambiguity feels like a loophole to buyers
- The refund process must be described in one sentence — complex processes signal the company doesn't want to honor it
- Checkout version must work in 1-2 sentences — the buyer is at the payment button, not reading paragraphs
- Conditional guarantees must name specific, achievable conditions — unreasonable conditions feel like a trap
- Double-money-back guarantees must only be recommended for proven products with low refund history
- Visual treatment must specify placement near the CTA — a guarantee buried in the footer doesn't reduce risk
- Specificity gate: Every claim in the copy must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "get results" or "improve your business"
- Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)
- Audience journey: The copy must reference where the reader IS (what they've tried, what's failing) — not just who they are demographically
- Proof diversity: Use at least 2 different proof types (testimonial, statistical, authority, case study) — do not rely on a single proof mode
- Objection handling: The copy must address at least 2 likely objections with concrete responses (ROI math, proof of similar result, risk reversal)
Related Skills
- Run
/offer-stackto integrate the guarantee into the full offer architecture - Run
/order-form-croto place the guarantee optimally on the checkout page - Run
/lander-copyfor the sales page that presents the guarantee - Run
/ab-test-planto test guarantee variations against each other - Run
/checkout-abandonmentto diagnose if weak guarantee copy is causing drop-off - Validate with
/rmbc-copy-audit
Attribution
Generated using RMBC framework by Stefan Georgi. Learn more: copyaccelerator.com/join
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.

