Cold Email Writer

Write cold emails a busy stranger will actually answer. Distilled from Y Combinator's cold-email advice, OpenVC's critique of the "custom hook" template, a 5-rule founder slide, Alex Hormozi's offer and sales advice, and the terse style of ~200 documented Musk emails.

Core idea: a cold email earns a reply with proof and clarity, not flattery or fake personalization. AI and mail-merge made the "Heard you on the podcast, congrats on X, since you're big on Y..." hook free, so recipients now read it as a template.

Workflow

1. Gather inputs. Need: sender (founder or SDR/agent?), recipient, what you do, best proof, the ask. If something is missing, draft anyway with [placeholders] and list what to fill in. Ask at most one question, only if the draft can't be written sensibly without it. 1b. Check the offer (sales, services, agency outreach). If there is no concrete offer (outcome, mechanism, timeline), fix that first. Read references/offer-and-sales.md.
2. Decide on personalization. Read references/personalization.md. Default is no hook. Include one only if it passes the "could this be pasted onto another recipient?" test.
3. Draft using the structure below. Read references/principles.md for the full rule set and references/examples.md to calibrate length and tone.
4. Run the self-check below and fix failures silently.
5. Deliver in the output format.

If the user pastes a draft, keep their facts, diagnose in 3-5 bullets (what reads as template, what's buried, what's unverifiable), then give the rewrite.

Structure (3-5 sentences, under 60 seconds to read)

1. What you do, plain words, zero jargon. Say what the product does, not the category.
2. Best proof, one or two checkable facts: paid pilots, revenue, growth, launch, named customers, a technical team with relevant credentials. Put the strongest first.
3. Why it matters to them (only if real and specific). Their pain in their words, or one genuine reason it's them. For sales, lead with the outcome and name the pain accurately (see references/offer-and-sales.md).
4. The ask, explicit and on its own line right before the sign-off. Ask for something small: a reply, advice, an intro, permission to send a short demo or deck. Not a 30-minute meeting from a stranger.
5. Sign off with name and role. Short, casual subject line (what + proof, e.g. "Automated bank QA, 2 paid pilots").

Self-check before delivering

• Under ~100 words? Readable aloud in under a minute?
• First sentence says what the company does, with no warm-up?
• Zero flattery, zero backstory, zero origin story?
• Every claim checkable? No "proven 10x ROI" or "$18B market" without a source or definition.
• Any hook passes the swap test, or is removed?
• One goal, one ask, on its own line, smaller than a meeting?
• Sounds like a person talking, not an AE or a pitch deck? ("Cheers", "I'd love to pick your brain", "game-changing" = cut.)
• Subject line short and casual?
• (Sales) Is there a real offer: outcome, mechanism, timeline? Scarcity or guarantee only if true?

Output format

1. The email (subject + body) in a block.
2. Under it, 2-4 lines: what's placeholder, what claim needs a source, and one optional variant (e.g. shorter, or with a real hook) only if useful.
3. Add the follow-up (see references/followups-and-delivery.md) only if asked or if the user is sending a sequence.

Keep commentary tight. Don't lecture about the rules unless asked.

Sender matters

Founder-sent emails get away with more brevity because the sender is the proof. An SDR, agent, or AI sender has to earn the reply from the email alone: stronger proof, clearer fit, borrowed credibility (customer names, YC, past employers). Ask or infer who is sending and adjust.

Tone

Default: plain, direct, founder-voice. If the user wants it blunter or more "Musk-style", read references/musk-tone.md. This is style only. Never present output as a real Musk email, and note that his emails are mostly warm or internal, so brevity there leaned on existing credibility.

Reference files

• references/principles.md: the consolidated rule set and where sources agree or conflict
• references/personalization.md: when and how to personalize, the swap test
• references/examples.md: before/after rewrites (investor, sales) and a bad-vs-good checklist
• references/offer-and-sales.md: Hormozi offer rules mapped onto email copy, value equation, sales-process rules, how they reconcile with YC/OpenVC
• references/musk-tone.md: terse-style moves and their limits for cold use
• references/followups-and-delivery.md: follow-up cadence, ignored emails, SPF/DKIM/DMARC check