Recursive Self-Improvement Loop

A pattern for generating higher-quality output by iterating against explicit scoring criteria.

The Pattern

generate → evaluate → diagnose → improve → repeat (until passing)

Never ship first-draft output for important content. Run the loop.

How It Works

1. Generate

Create the initial output as you normally would.

2. Evaluate

Score the output against each criterion (1-10). Be brutally honest.

3. Diagnose

For any criterion scoring below threshold:

• What specifically is weak?
• Why does it fail?
• What would "passing" look like?

4. Improve

Rewrite addressing each diagnosed weakness. Don't patch — rebuild the weak sections.

5. Repeat

Re-evaluate. Keep looping until all criteria pass threshold (usually 8/10 minimum).

Adversarial Pressure (Optional but Powerful)

After passing criteria, attack the output from a hostile perspective:

• Skeptical customer: "Why should I believe this? What's the catch?"
• Distracted scroller: "Would I stop for this? In 2 seconds?"
• Competitor: "How would a rival tear this apart?"

If it survives, ship it. If not, iterate.

Example Criteria by Use Case

Social Content

Adversarial test: Would a distracted, skeptical user at 11pm engage with this?

Landing Page / Web Copy

Adversarial test: Would someone searching on their phone take action within 30 seconds?

Email Copy

Adversarial test: Would a busy person with 200 unread emails act on this?

Ad Copy

Adversarial test: Would this stop YOUR scroll? Would you click?

When to Use

Always use for:

• Headlines and hooks
• CTAs and value props
• Key landing page sections
• Social posts (especially threads)
• Ad copy
• Important emails

Can skip for:

• Internal notes
• First-pass brainstorming
• Technical documentation
• Boilerplate content

Building Your Own Criteria

1. Pick one task you do repeatedly
2. Write down how YOU evaluate that output — what makes "good" vs "mid"?
3. Turn each into a pass/fail threshold — be specific ("9/10 minimum" not "make it good")
4. Add adversarial pressure — who would attack this? What would they say?
5. Save and reuse — now you have a system, not just a prompt

Quick Loop Template

## Output v1
[Initial generation]

## Evaluation v1
- Hook strength: 6/10 — Opens weak, no pattern interrupt
- Clarity: 8/10 — Clear enough
- Voice match: 7/10 — Too formal
[... score all criteria]

## Diagnosis
1. Hook needs a surprising stat or contrarian take
2. Voice should be more casual, shorter sentences
3. [...]

## Output v2
[Revised version addressing weaknesses]

## Evaluation v2
[Re-score — continue until all pass]

The loop typically adds 2-3 iterations. Worth it for anything that matters.