agentleFS
coleschaffercoleschaffer/copywritingskills-rmbc/skills/rmbc-context/SKILL.md

rmbc-context

Skill32 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Foundational RMBC methodology hub — provides shared framework context that all RMBC generative skills read during execution

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

1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Every piece of RMBC copy is evaluated on 4 dimensions (0-25 each, 0-100 total):

    line 71

≈ “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

rmbc-context

Purpose

This skill is the methodology hub for all RMBC generative skills. It defines the shared framework, terminology, quality dimensions, and structural patterns that downstream skills (research, mechanism, brief, copy) reference to ensure consistent application of Stefan Georgi's RMBC direct response copywriting system. No skill in the package generates output without first loading rmbc-context.

RMBC Framework Overview

RMBC (Research, Mechanism, Brief, Copy) is Stefan Georgi's direct response copywriting framework with $700M+ in attributed client results. The core insight is "Copy Thinking" over writing — strategic thinking about the prospect's context, awareness level, and traffic source determines copy structure before a single word is written. RMBC treats copywriting as an engineering discipline: systematic research feeds a novel mechanism, which informs a strategic brief, which produces high-converting copy.

Phase Definitions

Research (R)

ICP identification, pain points, desires, and market awareness levels. The 4-step research framework:

  1. Product/Market Awareness Analysis — Map where the prospect sits on the awareness spectrum (unaware → most aware). This determines copy length, directness, and education burden.
  2. Competitor Analysis — Study competing offers, their mechanisms, proof claims, and positioning gaps. Find what's overused and what's missing.
  3. Psychographic Research — Deep-dive into ICP language, emotional triggers, objections, and desire hierarchy. Mine reviews, forums, support tickets.
  4. Ingredient Research — For supplements/products: study compounds, clinical data, dosage ranges, and differentiators. For services/info: study methodology components and proof points.

Output: Unified Research Document — all four pillars merged into a copy-ready brief.

Mechanism (M)

The unique solution angle — a novel, specific explanation of WHY the product works. Not "it works" but "the patented tri-phase absorption complex delivers 3x bioavailability because..."

Mechanism ideation branches by vertical:

  • Supplements — Ingredient-based: unique compounds, delivery systems, synergistic combinations
  • E-commerce — Design/engineering-based: materials, manufacturing process, structural innovation
  • Info products — Methodology-based: proprietary framework, unique sequencing, contrarian approach

A strong mechanism passes the "only we" test: only this product can claim this specific mechanism.

Brief (B)

Strategic creative direction — the bridge between research and copy. The brief defines:

  • Angle — The emotional/logical entry point (which pain, desire, or curiosity gap to lead with)
  • Tone — Voice calibration based on traffic source and awareness level
  • Proof strategy — Which evidence types to deploy and in what order
  • CTA approach — The specific action and urgency framework

Copy (C)

Execution following RMBC structure: lead → mechanism reveal → proof → CTA.

Key principles:

  • Mobile-first — 80-90% of DTC traffic converts on mobile. Structural hierarchy must prioritize mobile view: short paragraphs, visual breaks, scannable subheads.
  • Context-dependent length — Copy tone and length vary by traffic source (Meta vs Native vs Search vs Email) and prospect awareness level. Cold traffic from native ads needs longer education; warm retargeting needs shorter, proof-heavy copy.
  • PDP extraction — Study top-performing product detail pages and extract proven structures before writing.

Copy Structure Guidelines

Lead patterns: curiosity gap, fear/consequence, desire/aspiration, social proof anchor, contrarian claim

Mechanism reveal patterns: problem-agitate-mechanism, story-to-discovery, scientific breakdown, before/after contrast

Proof patterns: specificity over generality — "73% of participants in a 12-week UCLA study" beats "clinically proven." Stack proof types: clinical, testimonial, demonstration, logical, authority.

CTA patterns: clear specific action + reason why now + risk reversal. Never vague. "Click the button below to claim your 3-bottle supply at 40% off before midnight" not "Learn more."

Quality Dimensions

Every piece of RMBC copy is evaluated on 4 dimensions (0-25 each, 0-100 total):

  1. Result specificity (0-25) — Outcome-focused with concrete details, not vague promises
  2. Mechanism novelty (0-25) — Unique explanation that passes the "only we" test
  3. Proof believability (0-25) — Specific, verifiable evidence stacked in multiple proof types
  4. CTA clarity (0-25) — Clear action with specific next step, urgency, and risk reversal

Scores below 60 indicate structural issues. Scores 80+ indicate production-ready copy.

Common Terminology

TermMeaning
ICPIdeal Customer Profile
DRDirect Response
DTCDirect to Consumer
MechanismUnique explanation of why the product works
HookFirst line/element that stops the scroll
LeadOpening section of copy (first 100-300 words)
ControlCurrent best-performing version of an ad/page
Swipe fileCollection of proven copy examples for reference
Split testA/B test comparing copy variations
CPACost Per Acquisition
ROASReturn on Ad Spend
Copy chiefSenior reviewer who evaluates and improves copy
Value-comparison pricingShowing unit economics explicitly

Integration

Downstream skills load rmbc-context before generating any output. The integration pattern:

  1. Skill reads rmbc-context/SKILL.md for framework overview and quality dimensions
  2. Skill reads rmbc-context/resources/rmbc-methodology.md for detailed phase guidance relevant to its function
  3. Skill applies phase-specific methodology to its generation task
  4. Skill evaluates output against the 4 quality dimensions before returning results

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.