agentleFS
coleschaffercoleschaffer/copywritingskills-rmbc/skills/upsell-sequence-writer/SKILL.md

upsell-sequence-writer

Skill32 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Generate post-purchase email upsell sequences (3-5 emails) that ascend customers from initial purchase to higher-ticket offers using RMBC-structured persuasion.

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

10 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 5 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.

  • 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 30
  2. Distinctive:

    Emails 1-2: No selling. Pure value delivery.

    line 55
  3. Distinctive:

    Read all emails in order. Check:

    line 62
  4. Distinctive:

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

    line 114
  5. Distinctive:

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

    line 115
  6. Distinctive:

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

    line 117
  7. Very specific:

    Run /mechanism-ideation for the upsell product's mechanism

    line 122
  8. Very specific:

    Run /upsell-script for the immediate post-purchase OTO page (before this sequence)

    line 123
  9. Very specific:

    Run /email-promo for standalone promotional emails outside a sequence

    line 124
  10. Very specific:

    Run /hook-battery for subject line inspiration

    line 125

≈ “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

upsell-sequence-writer

Purpose

Generate a post-purchase email sequence (3-5 emails) that ascends customers from their initial purchase to a higher-ticket complementary offer. These emails deploy after the buyer has already said yes — trust is established, the product is in hand (or arriving), and the window for ascension is open. Each email must deliver genuine value before bridging to the upsell. The sequence arc moves from gratitude through value delivery to the offer, with urgency closing the window. Every email uses RMBC principles compressed into short-form format.

Inputs

InputRequiredDescription
initial_productYesWhat the customer already purchased — name, price, core promise
upsell_productYesThe higher-ticket offer — name, price, what it does, how it complements the initial purchase
upsell_priceYesPrice of the upsell with any discount framing
target_audienceYesWho the buyer is — demographics, pain points, desires, sophistication level
sequence_lengthNoNumber of emails: 3, 4, or 5 (default: 5)
key_mechanismNoThe upsell product's unique mechanism (output from /mechanism-ideation)
send_timingNoDays between emails (default: Day 1, 3, 5, 7, 9)

Execution Protocol

Step 1 — Load Framework Context

Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions. Upsell sequences deploy RMBC across multiple touchpoints — Research informs the value content, Mechanism justifies the upsell, Brief structures the sequence arc, Copy executes each email.

Step 2 — Define the Sequence Arc

Map the emotional journey across the sequence:

EmailRoleEmotional StateRMBC Focus
1 — Thank YouValidate purchase, deliver quick winExcited, hopefulResearch (reinforce their decision)
2 — Value DeliveryTeach something useful related to their purchaseEngaged, learningResearch → Mechanism tease
3 — BridgeConnect initial product's limitation to upsell needCurious, aware of gapMechanism reveal
4 — OfferPresent the upsell with full value stackDesire, trustBrief → Copy (full pitch)
5 — Urgency CloseFinal window, scarcity, guarantee restatementFear of missing outCopy (close)

For 3-email sequences: combine emails 1+2, 3+4, and keep 5. For 4-email sequences: combine emails 1+2 and keep 3, 4, 5.

Step 3 — Write Each Email

For each email, produce:

  • Subject line (under 50 characters, mobile-optimized)
  • Preview text (40-90 characters, complements subject)
  • Body copy following the email's role from the arc
  • CTA appropriate to the email's position (soft early, hard late)

Rules per email position:

  • Emails 1-2: No selling. Pure value delivery. Build goodwill.
  • Email 3: Bridge only. Reveal the gap, tease the solution. Soft CTA at most.
  • Email 4: Full offer with mechanism, value stack, price anchoring, guarantee.
  • Email 5: Urgency, deadline, guarantee restatement, final CTA. Short and direct.

Step 4 — Validate Sequence Coherence

Read all emails in order. Check:

  1. Does each email build on the previous? No redundant points.
  2. Does the value-to-pitch ratio feel earned? (At least 2 value emails before the offer)
  3. Does the urgency in the final email feel real? (Deadline, limited quantity, or price increase)
  4. Could a reader skip to email 4 and still understand the offer? (It must standalone too)

Output Format

## Upsell Sequence: [Initial Product] → [Upsell Product]

**Sequence Length:** [3-5] emails
**Send Schedule:** [Day 1, Day 3, Day 5, ...]
**Audience:** [target audience summary]

---

### Email 1: [Role Label] — Day [X]

**Subject:** [subject line]
**Preview:** [preview text]

[Full email body]

[CTA or sign-off appropriate to position]

---

### Email 2: [Role Label] — Day [X]

[...continue for each email...]

---

## Sequence Strategy Notes

- **Value-to-pitch ratio:** [X value emails : Y pitch emails]
- **Mechanism reveal timing:** Email [X] — [why this timing]
- **Urgency type:** [deadline | limited quantity | price increase | bonus expiration]
- **Standalone test:** Email [4] works as a standalone pitch: [yes/no + why]

Quality Criteria

  • First 1-2 emails must deliver genuine value — no selling, no "by the way" pitches
  • Each email must have a clear single purpose aligned to its arc position
  • Subject lines must be under 50 characters and work on mobile
  • The bridge email (3) must make the upsell feel like a logical next step, not a random offer
  • Offer email (4) must work as a standalone pitch if read in isolation
  • Urgency in final email must be real — name the specific deadline, quantity, or trigger
  • Sequence must feel like a relationship, not a drip campaign of pitches
  • 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-ideation for the upsell product's mechanism
  • Run /upsell-script for the immediate post-purchase OTO page (before this sequence)
  • Run /email-promo for standalone promotional emails outside a sequence
  • Run /hook-battery for subject line inspiration
  • Validate 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.