Hook Write

Generate high-performing hooks for any content type and platform. The hook is the single most important element — if nobody stops scrolling, the rest doesn't matter. This skill produces multiple variations so the best one can be A/B tested or selected.

Purpose

90% of the post's success is determined before the reader finishes the first sentence. Most failed posts aren't bad posts — they have bad hooks. This skill separates the hook from the body so each can be optimized independently.

When to Use

• Before writing any post or thread (hook-first writing)
• A/B testing variations (deploy 2 versions, measure which wins)
• Existing post underperformed — diagnose if the hook was the problem
• Content calendar needs hooks drafted in advance
• Founder says "I have an idea" but doesn't know how to open

Inputs Required

• Core idea (one sentence — what this content communicates)
• Target platform
• Desired emotional reaction (curiosity, recognition, urgency, validation)
• Brand voice constraints (any hook styles that are off-limits)

Quick Reference

Procedure

1. Define the core idea. One sentence: "This post is about [X] and the reader should feel [Y]."
2. Select the target emotion:
   • Curiosity ("I need to know more")
   • Recognition ("That's exactly me")
   • Intrigue ("Wait, is that true?")
   • Urgency ("I need this now")
   • Validation ("Someone finally said it")
3. Generate 5-10 hooks across 5-6 styles (selecting the most suitable for platform and topic):
   • At least 1 Promise-style
   • At least 1 Contrarian-style
   • At least 1 Story-style (if applicable)
   • At least 1 Question-style (for LinkedIn/IG)
   • At least 1 Statistic/Number-led (if data available)
   • At least 1 Observation-style (for X)
4. Adapt each hook to the target platform:
   • X: First 3-5 words are everything. Max 280 chars total.
   • LinkedIn: First 2 lines (before "see more"). Tease without clickbait.
   • IG: Hook works with the visual. First line of caption is critical.
   • TikTok: Text overlay + first 1.5 seconds of audio/visual.
5. Score each hook on:
   • Curiosity gap: does it make you need to know more? (1-10)
   • Specificity: is it concrete vs. generic? (1-10)
   • Brand-fit: does it sound like the brand? (1-10)
   • Platform-fit: does it follow platform rules? (1-10)
6. Rank and recommend. Top 2 hooks: one primary pick + one A/B challenger.

Output Format

# Hook Variations: [Post Topic / Platform]

## Core Idea
[One sentence — what this post is about]

## Hook Variations

### 1. [Style: Promise/Contrarian/etc.]
[Hook text, formatted for platform]
**Curiosity:** [1-10] **Specificity:** [1-10] **Brand-fit:** [1-10] **Platform-fit:** [1-10]

### 2. [Style]
...

## Top Picks
1. **Recommended:** [Hook + why]
2. **A/B challenger:** [Alternate + why]

## Platform Adaptations
- X version: [shorter, punchier]
- LinkedIn version: [slightly more professional framing]
- IG version: [visual-led version]
- TikTok version: [text overlay + hook timing]

Done Criteria

The skill is complete when:

1. At least 5 hook variations exist across different styles
2. Each hook is formatted for the target platform
3. Hooks are scored on all 4 dimensions
4. A primary and challenger hook are recommended
5. Platform adaptations are provided (if applicable)

Pitfalls

• Hooks that overpromise ("This one trick will 10x your revenue") — kills trust
• Hooks that are all sizzle, no steak (the post doesn't deliver on the promise)
• Question hooks where the audience already knows the answer
• Clickbait that would embarrass the founder
• Using the same hook style for every post (pattern fatigue)

Verification

For each top hook: what does it promise? Does the actual post deliver that exact promise? If the answer is "sort of," rewrite either the hook or the post until it's a clean match.

Example

Input: Topic = "Why most SaaS startups fail at cold email." Platform = X. Emotion = curiosity + recognition.

Output:

1. (Promise) "I read 50,000 cold emails. Here are the 3 that booked meetings." — Curiosity: 9, Specificity: 9, Brand-fit: 8, Platform-fit: 10
2. (Contrarian) "Everyone tells you to personalize cold emails. That's wrong." — Curiosity: 8, Specificity: 8, Brand-fit: 7, Platform-fit: 9
3. (Statistic) "97% of cold emails get ignored. The 3% that work share 1 pattern." — Curiosity: 9, Specificity: 9, Brand-fit: 8, Platform-fit: 10
4. (Story) "I sent 1,000 cold emails. Got 2 replies. Here's what I changed." — Curiosity: 7, Specificity: 8, Brand-fit: 8, Platform-fit: 9
5. (Observation) "The cold emails that work don't look like cold emails." — Curiosity: 7, Specificity: 7, Brand-fit: 9, Platform-fit: 10

Recommended: #3 (statistic-led, highest combined score). Challenger: #2 (contrarian, different angle).