agentleFS
coleschaffercoleschaffer/copywritingskills-rmbc/skills/pdp-ecomm-template/SKILL.md

pdp-ecomm-template

Skill32 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Generate RMBC-structured product detail page (PDP) copy for e-commerce — extracts proven structure from top-performing pages and rewrites for a new product.

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

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    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 for framework overview, quality dimensions, and mobile-first principles.

    line 28
  2. Very specific:

    If reference_page_url is provided, analyze the page structure and extract the section-by-section template (headings, proof placement, CTA …

    line 39
  3. Distinctive:

    Write each section following the output structure.

    line 42
  4. Distinctive:

    Every ingredient/feature claim backed by a specific proof point (number, study, patent)

    line 113
  5. Distinctive:

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

    line 119
  6. Distinctive:

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

    line 120
  7. Distinctive:

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

    line 122

≈ “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

PDP E-Commerce Template

Purpose

Generate high-converting product detail page copy using RMBC methodology. The skill extracts structural patterns from proven top-performing PDPs (Primal Queen, Happy Mammoth, etc.) and applies that architecture to a new product. The PDP is often the highest-revenue page in a DTC funnel — every word is high-leverage.

Inputs

InputRequiredDescription
product_nameYesProduct name as it appears on the label/site
product_descriptionYesWhat the product is, what it does, core value proposition
key_ingredients_featuresYesTop ingredients or features with proof points (clinical data, patents, percentages)
price_pointYesRetail price + any bundle/subscription pricing
target_audienceYesICP description — demographics, psychographics, core pain
reference_page_urlNoURL of a high-performing PDP to extract structure from
traffic_sourceNometa | native | organic | email. Default: meta. Adjusts tone/length

Execution Protocol

Step 1: Load Context

Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md for framework overview, quality dimensions, and mobile-first principles.

Step 2: Calibrate for Traffic Source

Adjust copy length and tone based on traffic source:

  • Meta (warm): Shorter, proof-heavy, assumes some brand awareness. Lead with social proof or results.
  • Meta (cold): Medium length, problem-agitate-mechanism structure. Education required.
  • Native ads: Longest copy. Advertorial-adjacent tone. Full mechanism education before product reveal.
  • Organic/SEO: Balanced length. Feature-benefit focus. FAQ-heavy for search intent.
  • Email: Shortest. Relationship-aware. Lead with offer or new proof.

Step 3: Extract Reference Structure

If reference_page_url is provided, analyze the page structure and extract the section-by-section template (headings, proof placement, CTA cadence, mobile layout). If not provided, use the default 9-section PDP architecture below.

Step 4: Generate PDP Copy

Write each section following the output structure. Apply mobile-first hierarchy: short paragraphs, scannable subheads, visual break points noted in brackets.

Step 5: Apply Value-Comparison Pricing

In the price anchoring section, explicitly calculate unit economics. Show the math: "$X per serving vs $Y for [competitor/alternative]." Make the comparison visceral and specific.

Step 6: Validate Against Quality Dimensions

Score the draft against RMBC quality dimensions (result specificity, mechanism novelty, proof believability, CTA clarity). Flag any dimension below 15/25 with a revision note.

Output Format

## PDP Copy: [Product Name]
**Traffic source:** [source] | **ICP:** [1-line summary]

---

### 1. Above the Fold
**Headline:** [Primary headline — benefit-driven, specific]
**Subhead:** [Mechanism hint or proof point]
**Hero image direction:** [What the image should communicate]
**Primary CTA:** [Button text + context]

### 2. Problem Section
[Agitate the core pain. Be specific to the ICP. Use their language. 3-5 short paragraphs, mobile-optimized.]

### 3. Mechanism Reveal
[Why THIS product works. Unique angle that passes the "only we" test. Bridge from problem to solution without being generic.]

### 4. Ingredient/Feature Highlights
**[Ingredient/Feature 1]:** [Proof point — clinical data, percentage, patent]
**[Ingredient/Feature 2]:** [Proof point]
**[Ingredient/Feature 3]:** [Proof point]
[Up to 5. Each must have a specific proof point, not a vague claim.]

### 5. Social Proof Section
**Star rating:** [X.X / 5]
**Review count:** [N+ reviews]
**Featured testimonial 1:** "[Quote]" — [Name, credential/context]
**Featured testimonial 2:** "[Quote]" — [Name, credential/context]
**Placement note:** [Where to position reviews relative to CTA]

### 6. Value Stack
| You Get | Retail Value |
|---------|-------------|
| [Item 1] | $XX |
| [Item 2] | $XX |
| [Bonus if applicable] | $XX |
| **Total value** | **$XXX** |

### 7. Price Anchoring
[Value-comparison pricing. Show unit economics explicitly. Compare to competitor price, daily coffee, or relevant anchor. Make the math obvious.]

### 8. CTA + Guarantee
**CTA:** [Specific button text + urgency element]
**Guarantee:** [Risk reversal — days, terms, tone]
**Guarantee framing:** [How to present the guarantee as confidence, not desperation]

### 9. FAQ
1. **[Objection as question]** — [Direct answer that resolves and redirects to benefit]
2. **[Objection as question]** — [Answer]
3. **[Objection as question]** — [Answer]
4. **[Objection as question]** — [Answer]
5. **[Objection as question]** — [Answer]

---
> Generated using RMBC framework by Stefan Georgi.
> Learn more: [copyaccelerator.com/join](https://copyaccelerator.com/join)

Quality Criteria

  • Mobile-first: no paragraph longer than 3 lines on mobile (roughly 40 words max)
  • Every ingredient/feature claim backed by a specific proof point (number, study, patent)
  • Value-comparison pricing includes explicit unit economics math
  • Mechanism section passes the "only we" test — not interchangeable with competitor claims
  • CTA is specific action + urgency + risk reversal (never "Learn more")
  • FAQ questions are real objections, not softballs
  • 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

  • ingredient-research — run first to generate proof points for ingredient/feature highlights
  • unified-research-synthesizer — run first for strategic brief and ICP deep-dive
  • mechanism-ideation — run first to develop the unique angle for section 3
  • rmbc-copy-audit — validate the finished PDP copy against RMBC scoring

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.