lander-copy
Skill32 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Generate RMBC-structured landing page copy — mobile-first, conversion-optimized, with value-stack pricing and full page architecture.
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★ 445% 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
- guarantee-writerSkill
- hook-batterySkill
- ingredient-researchSkill
- 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, 7 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 31
Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions.
- Distinctive: line 60
One idea per mobile screen: If a section runs long, break it into sub-sections.
- Distinctive: line 68
Problem: Use prospect's own language.
- Distinctive: line 136
No section should require more than 2 thumb-scrolls on mobile
- Distinctive: line 138
Every CTA button must use action language ("Get [Result] Now"), never generic ("Submit", "Click Here")
- Distinctive: line 142
Specificity gate: Every claim in the copy must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "get results" or "improve your business"
- Distinctive: line 143
Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)
- Distinctive: line 145
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 150
Run /mechanism-ideation for the core mechanism
- Very specific: line 151
Run /hook-battery for hero headline options
- Very specific: line 152
Run /lead-writer for alternative hero section approaches
≈ “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
lander-copy
Purpose
Generate complete landing page copy structured around RMBC principles. Landing pages are where traffic converts — every element must earn its place. Mobile-first is non-negotiable: 80-90% of DTC traffic arrives on phones. This skill outputs full page copy with section-by-section structure, ready for a designer or page builder. Enforces value-comparison pricing (anchor high, reveal real price as contrast) and includes all conversion elements: social proof, guarantee, FAQ, and multiple CTAs.
Inputs
| Input | Required | Description |
product_description | Yes | What the product is, what it does, key features/ingredients/components |
target_audience | Yes | Who the prospect is — demographics, pain points, desires, sophistication level |
price_point | Yes | Product price, payment plans, and any discounts |
traffic_source | Yes | Where traffic comes from: paid_social, native, search, email, organic |
key_mechanism | Yes | The product's unique mechanism (output from /mechanism-ideation) |
guarantee | No | Money-back guarantee details (default: assume 60-day guarantee) |
proof_points | No | Testimonials, reviews, clinical data, media mentions |
page_type | No | One of: long_form (full sales page), short_form (squeeze/lead gen), hybrid (default: long_form) |
Execution Protocol
Step 1 — Load Framework Context
Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions. Landing pages deploy RMBC in a scrollable format — each section maps to a phase: Research informs audience targeting and proof selection, Mechanism drives the core value proposition, Brief structures the page architecture, Copy executes each section.
Step 2 — Define Page Architecture
Map sections based on page_type:
Long Form (Full Sales Page)
| Section | Mobile Screens | Purpose |
| Hero | 1 | Headline + subhead + CTA + hero image |
| Problem | 1-2 | Agitate pain, build urgency |
| Failed Solutions | 1 | Disqualify alternatives |
| Mechanism Reveal | 2-3 | Introduce unique mechanism with visual |
| Features → Benefits | 2-3 | Translate features into outcomes |
| Social Proof Block 1 | 1-2 | Testimonials or case studies |
| Value Stack | 1-2 | List everything they get with anchor pricing |
| Price Reveal | 1 | Contrast anchor vs actual price |
| Guarantee | 1 | Risk reversal |
| Social Proof Block 2 | 1 | Additional proof (different type from Block 1) |
| FAQ | 1-2 | Handle remaining objections |
| Final CTA | 1 | Restate offer, guarantee, urgency |
Short Form (Squeeze/Lead Gen)
Hero → Problem (brief) → Solution Promise → CTA → Social Proof → CTA
Step 3 — Write Each Section
Rules for all sections:
- One idea per mobile screen. If a section runs long, break it into sub-sections.
- Headlines for every section. Scanners read headlines only — each must standalone.
- CTAs appear 3+ times on long-form pages (hero, mid-page, final).
- Value stack must anchor high. Total perceived value should be 5-10x the actual price.
- Price reveal uses contrast framing. "Not $297... not $197... just $97 today."
Section-specific guidance:
- Hero: Headline states the outcome. Subhead names the mechanism. CTA is visible without scrolling.
- Problem: Use prospect's own language. Be specific — name the frustration, the cost, the emotional toll.
- Mechanism: Explain WHY this works, not just WHAT it does. Use analogy or metaphor.
- Features → Benefits: 3-column or icon grid. Each feature gets a "which means..." benefit translation.
- Social Proof: Mix types — testimonial quotes, star ratings, logos, numbers ("10,000+ customers").
- FAQ: 5-7 questions. Each answer is a disguised objection handler.
Step 4 — Traffic Source Alignment
Adjust copy tone and structure for traffic source:
- Paid Social: Hook-heavy hero, shorter sections, more visual cues
- Native: Editorial tone in hero, softer sell, more proof
- Search: Intent-matched headline, features prominent, comparison-friendly
- Email: Assumes pre-awareness, can skip problem section, go straight to offer
- Organic: SEO-friendly headlines, longer mechanism section, educational tone
Output Format
## Landing Page: [Product Name]
**Page Type:** [long_form | short_form | hybrid]
**Traffic Source:** [source]
**Price:** [price point]
**Guarantee:** [guarantee summary]
---
### SECTION 1: HERO
**Headline:** [headline]
**Subhead:** [subhead]
**CTA Button:** [button text]
**Supporting text:** [1-2 lines below CTA]
---
### SECTION 2: PROBLEM
**Section Headline:** [headline]
[Copy — 100-200 words]
---
[...continue for each section...]
---
### VALUE STACK
| What You Get | Value |
|-------------|-------|
| [Item 1] | $XX |
| [Item 2] | $XX |
| [Item 3 — Bonus] | $XX |
| **Total Value** | **$XXX** |
| **Today's Price** | **$XX** |
---
## Page Summary
- **Total sections:** X
- **Estimated word count:** X,XXX
- **CTA placements:** 3 (hero, mid-page, final)
- **Mobile screens:** ~XXQuality Criteria
- Hero headline must communicate the core outcome in under 10 words
- No section should require more than 2 thumb-scrolls on mobile
- Value stack total must be 5-10x the actual price — if not, add bonuses
- Every CTA button must use action language ("Get [Result] Now"), never generic ("Submit", "Click Here")
- FAQ must address price objection, skepticism objection, and "is this for me?" objection
- Social proof must appear before AND after the price reveal
- 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
/mechanism-ideationfor the core mechanism - Run
/hook-batteryfor hero headline options - Run
/lead-writerfor alternative hero section approaches - Drive traffic to this page from
/advertorial-writeror/email-promo - 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.

