agentleFS
coleschaffercoleschaffer/copywritingskills-rmbc/skills/lead-writer/SKILL.md

lead-writer

Skill32 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Generate the opening lead section of long-form DR copy — the first 200-500 words that determine whether the prospect reads or bounces.

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

14 rules. About 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈9

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions.

    line 28
  2. Distinctive:

    Use sensory details — what they saw, felt, heard

    line 47
  3. Distinctive:

    Use "you" language — make it personal

    line 54
  4. Distinctive:

    Use specificity to build credibility ("a 47-year-old accountant from Tulsa")

    line 62
  5. Distinctive:

    Use institutional credibility (universities, journals, experts)

    line 68
  6. Distinctive:

    Keep tone neutral/editorial in the first paragraph, then shift to personal relevance

    line 69
  7. Very specific:

    If lead_type is specific, write 3 variations of that type.

    line 77
  8. Distinctive:

    All leads must transition naturally into a mechanism reveal or body copy

    line 144
  9. Distinctive:

    Specificity gate: Every claim in the copy must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "get results" or "improve your business"

    line 147
  10. Distinctive:

    Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)

    line 148
  11. Distinctive:

    Proof diversity: Use at least 2 different proof types (testimonial, statistical, authority, case study) — do not rely on a single proof mode

    line 150
  12. Very specific:

    Run /hook-battery for the headline/hook that precedes the lead

    line 155
  13. Very specific:

    Run /mechanism-ideation for the mechanism the lead must set up

    line 156
  14. Very specific:

    Use leads in /vsl-script, /lander-copy, or /advertorial-writer

    line 157

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

lead-writer

Purpose

Generate the opening lead of long-form direct response copy. The lead is the first 200-500 words after the headline — it determines whether a prospect commits to reading or bounces. A great hook earns attention; a great lead earns the next 2,000 words. This skill produces 3 lead variations across different lead types so the copywriter can test or choose the strongest opening for their format (sales page, VSL, advertorial, email).

Inputs

InputRequiredDescription
product_descriptionYesWhat the product is, what it does, key features/ingredients/components
target_audienceYesWho the prospect is — demographics, pain points, desires, sophistication level
lead_typeYesOne of: story, problem_agitation, curiosity, news, contrarian — or auto to get best-fit recommendation
key_mechanismNoThe product's unique mechanism (output from /mechanism-ideation)
format_contextNoWhere this lead will be used: sales_page, vsl, advertorial, email, general (default: general)

Execution Protocol

Step 1 — Load Framework Context

Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions. The lead sits between the hook (first line) and the body copy — it must sustain the curiosity the hook created while building enough emotional investment to carry the reader into the mechanism reveal.

Step 2 — Analyze Audience Sophistication

Determine market awareness level (Eugene Schwartz scale):

  • Most Aware — Knows product, needs deal → Lead with offer
  • Product Aware — Knows product, not convinced → Lead with proof/differentiation
  • Solution Aware — Knows solutions exist, not yours → Lead with mechanism
  • Problem Aware — Feels pain, no solution → Lead with problem agitation
  • Unaware — Doesn't know they have a problem → Lead with story or news

Match lead type to awareness level. If lead_type: auto, recommend based on this analysis.

Step 3 — Write 3 Lead Variations

Generate 3 distinct leads (200-500 words each):

Story Lead

  • Open with a specific person, moment, or scene
  • Use sensory details — what they saw, felt, heard
  • The story must connect to the prospect's situation within 3 paragraphs
  • End with a pivot toward the problem or mechanism

Problem-Agitation Lead

  • Name the problem in the first sentence
  • Agitate with specific consequences (financial, emotional, social, physical)
  • Use "you" language — make it personal
  • Escalate from annoying to urgent
  • End with implied promise of a solution

Curiosity Lead

  • Open a knowledge gap immediately
  • Reference something specific and unexpected
  • Tease a mechanism or discovery without revealing it
  • Use specificity to build credibility ("a 47-year-old accountant from Tulsa")
  • End with a promise to reveal

News Lead

  • Open with a time reference ("Last month...", "In a recent study...")
  • Frame the mechanism as a discovery or breakthrough
  • Use institutional credibility (universities, journals, experts)
  • Keep tone neutral/editorial in the first paragraph, then shift to personal relevance

Contrarian Lead

  • Challenge a belief the audience currently holds
  • Be specific about what conventional wisdom says
  • Provide a credible reason why the common approach fails
  • Position the mechanism as the unconventional alternative

If lead_type is specific, write 3 variations of that type. If auto, write the top 3 recommended types.

Step 4 — Assess Each Lead

For each variation, provide:

  • Strength score (1-5) with reasoning
  • Best format fit — which copy format this lead works best in
  • Awareness match — which awareness level this lead targets
  • Risk factor — what could cause this lead to fail

Output Format

## Lead Variations: [Product Name]

**Audience:** [target audience summary]
**Awareness Level:** [assessed level]
**Mechanism:** [key mechanism, if provided]

---

### Lead 1: [Type] — Strength: X/5

[Full lead copy, 200-500 words]

**Assessment:**
- Best for: [format]
- Awareness match: [level]
- Risk: [what could cause failure]

---

### Lead 2: [Type] — Strength: X/5

[Full lead copy, 200-500 words]

**Assessment:**
- Best for: [format]
- Awareness match: [level]
- Risk: [what could cause failure]

---

### Lead 3: [Type] — Strength: X/5

[Full lead copy, 200-500 words]

**Assessment:**
- Best for: [format]
- Awareness match: [level]
- Risk: [what could cause failure]

---

## Recommendation

**Strongest lead:** Lead #X
**Reasoning:** [why this lead wins for this product + audience combo]
**Suggested test:** [which two leads to A/B test and why]

Quality Criteria

  • Each lead must hook within the first 2 sentences — no slow warmups
  • Story leads must use specific, concrete details — not generic scenarios
  • Problem-agitation leads must name real consequences, not vague discomfort
  • Curiosity leads must tease something specific — not empty intrigue
  • All leads must transition naturally into a mechanism reveal or body copy
  • Word count must stay in 200-500 range — leads that run long lose their purpose
  • 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 /hook-battery for the headline/hook that precedes the lead
  • Run /mechanism-ideation for the mechanism the lead must set up
  • Use leads in /vsl-script, /lander-copy, or /advertorial-writer
  • Validate full copy with /rmbc-copy-audit

Attribution

Generated using RMBC framework by Stefan Georgi. Learn more: copyaccelerator.com/join

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.