diff --git a/skills/cold-email/SKILL.md b/skills/cold-email/SKILL.md index c2707fe..7ba8a85 100644 --- a/skills/cold-email/SKILL.md +++ b/skills/cold-email/SKILL.md @@ -5,159 +5,151 @@ description: Write B2B cold emails and follow-up sequences that get replies. Use # Cold Email Writing -Write B2B cold emails optimized for reply rates. Based on data from 85M+ analyzed emails (Gong), 16.5M campaigns (Belkins), and billions of scored messages (Lavender). +You are an expert cold email writer. Your goal is to write emails that sound like they came from a sharp, thoughtful human — not a sales machine following a template. -## Required Inputs +## Before Writing -Before writing, gather or confirm: +**Check for product marketing context first:** +If `.claude/product-marketing-context.md` exists, read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task. -1. **Prospect info** — Name, role, company, industry, company size -2. **Research signals** — At least one: recent funding, job postings, LinkedIn activity, tech stack, company news, podcast/talks, website changes -3. **Value proposition** — The specific problem solved and for whom -4. **Social proof** — A relevant case study: [Similar Company] + [Specific Result] + [Timeframe] -5. **Sequence context** — First touch, follow-up number, or breakup email +Understand the situation (ask if not provided): -If the user hasn't provided these, ask before writing. +1. **Who are you writing to?** — Role, company, why them specifically +2. **What do you want?** — The outcome (meeting, reply, intro, demo) +3. **What's the value?** — The specific problem you solve for people like them +4. **What's your proof?** — A result, case study, or credibility signal +5. **Any research signals?** — Funding, hiring, LinkedIn posts, company news, tech stack changes -## Core Principles (ranked by impact) +Work with whatever the user gives you. If they have a strong signal and a clear value prop, that's enough to write. Don't block on missing inputs — use what you have and note what would make it stronger. -### 1. Select the right hook type +--- -Timeline hooks outperform problem hooks by **3.4x in meetings booked**. +## Writing Principles -| Hook type | Reply rate | Meeting rate | When to use | -| ------------ | ---------- | ------------ | ---------------------------------- | -| Timeline | 10.01% | 2.34% | Trigger events, deadlines, seasons | -| Numbers | 8.57% | 1.86% | Strong quantified results | -| Social proof | 7.12% | 1.21% | Recognizable client wins | -| Problem | 4.39% | 0.69% | Only when pain is acute + specific | +### Write like a peer, not a vendor -### 2. Personalize to the problem, not the person +The email should read like it came from someone who understands their world — not someone trying to sell them something. Use contractions. Read it aloud. If it sounds like marketing copy, rewrite it. -Every personalized element must logically connect to the problem you solve. Remove the personalization — if the email still makes sense, it isn't doing its job. +### Every sentence must earn its place + +Cold email is ruthlessly short. If a sentence doesn't move the reader toward replying, cut it. The best cold emails feel like they could have been shorter, not longer. + +### Personalization must connect to the problem + +If you remove the personalized opening and the email still makes sense, the personalization isn't working. The observation should naturally lead into why you're reaching out. See [personalization.md](references/personalization.md) for the 4-level system and research signals. -### 3. Keep it radically short and human +### Lead with their world, not yours -- **50–80 words** for cold openers. Never exceed 125. -- **3rd–5th grade reading level**: no sentence over 20 words, no word over 3 syllables unless it's a proper noun. -- "You/your" should appear **3x more** than "I/we." Every sentence should serve the reader. -- 2–3 line paragraphs max. Generous white space. Plain text only. -- **Tone: conversational-professional.** Write like a peer talking to a peer — not texting a friend, not pitching on Shark Tank. Use contractions. Read it aloud; if it doesn't sound like speech, rewrite. +The reader should see their own situation reflected back. "You/your" should dominate over "I/we." Don't open with who you are or what your company does. -### 4. Use interest-based CTAs, not meeting asks +### One ask, low friction -Soft CTAs ("Worth a chat?" / "Open to exploring?") outperform hard CTAs ("Book a meeting here"). One CTA per email. Under 6 words. Close-ended yes/no. - -### 5. Subject lines: short, boring, internal-looking - -- **2–4 words**, lowercase, no punctuation tricks. -- Look like an internal email ("reply rates", "hiring ops", "Q2 forecast"). -- No salesy words, numbers, emojis, urgency, or product pitches. -- Never use prospect's first name (signals automation). - -See [subject-lines.md](references/subject-lines.md) for full rules and data. - -### 6. Follow-ups must add new value - -Each follow-up uses a different angle. Never "just checking in." 3–5 total emails with increasing gaps. 55% of replies come from follow-ups. - -See [follow-up-sequences.md](references/follow-up-sequences.md) for cadence and angle rotation. - -## Framework Selection - -Default to PAS for most situations. Match to context: - -| Framework | Best for | Structure | -| ------------------ | ------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------- | -| **PAS** | Problem-aware prospects (default) | Problem → Agitate → Solution | -| **BAB** | Transformation stories, emotional buyers | Before → After → Bridge | -| **QVC** | C-suite, ultra-brevity needed | Question → Value → CTA | -| **Star-Story-Sol** | Strong case study available | Character → Challenge → Result | -| **PPP** | Genuine trigger event to praise | Praise → Picture → Push | -| **3C's (Berman)** | Agency/services with vertical case studies | Compliment → Case Study → CTA | -| **Mouse Trap** | Maximum brevity, curiosity-driven | Observation + Binary question (1–2 lines) | - -See [frameworks.md](references/frameworks.md) for all frameworks with examples. - -## Workflow - -### Step 1: Assess inputs - -Confirm prospect info, research signals, value prop, and social proof. Ask for missing pieces. - -### Step 2: Select framework + hook type - -Match framework to prospect seniority and awareness level. Default to timeline or numbers hooks. - -### Step 3: Write the email - -Five-line structure: - -``` -[Personalized trigger/observation — 1 sentence] -[Pain point connection — 1 sentence] -[Social proof/specific result — 1 sentence] -[Concise value connection — 1 sentence] -[Low-friction CTA — 1 sentence] -``` - -### Step 4: Self-check - -Before presenting: - -- [ ] Under 80 words? -- [ ] 3rd–5th grade reading level? (no sentence >20 words, no word >3 syllables) -- [ ] "You/your" appears 3x more than "I/we"? -- [ ] Tone sounds like a peer, not a vendor? (read aloud test) -- [ ] Personalization connects to the problem? -- [ ] One CTA, interest-based, under 6 words? -- [ ] Subject line: 2–4 words, lowercase, internal-looking? -- [ ] No jargon, feature dumps, or self-proclaimed superlatives? -- [ ] Passes the "so what?" test from prospect's perspective? - -### Step 5: Generate follow-up sequence (if requested) - -Write 2–4 follow-ups with different angles per [follow-up-sequences.md](references/follow-up-sequences.md). - -## Output Format - -Present each email as: - -``` -**Subject:** [subject line] -**Framework:** [framework used] -**Hook type:** [timeline/numbers/social proof/problem] +Interest-based CTAs ("Worth exploring?" / "Would this be useful?") beat meeting requests. One CTA per email. Make it easy to say yes with a one-line reply. --- -[Email body] +## Voice & Tone + +**The target voice:** A smart colleague who noticed something relevant and is sharing it. Conversational but not sloppy. Confident but not pushy. + +**Calibrate to the audience:** + +- C-suite: ultra-brief, peer-level, understated +- Mid-level: more specific value, slightly more detail +- Technical: precise, no fluff, respect their intelligence + +**What it should NOT sound like:** + +- A template with fields swapped in +- A pitch deck compressed into paragraph form +- A LinkedIn DM from someone you've never met +- An AI-generated email (avoid the telltale patterns: "I hope this email finds you well," "I came across your profile," "leverage," "synergy," "best-in-class") --- -**Word count:** [N] -**Reading level:** [grade level] -**I/You ratio:** [ratio] -``` +## Structure -For sequences, present all emails with day numbers and angle labels. +There's no single right structure. Choose a framework that fits the situation, or write freeform if the email flows naturally without one. -## Anti-Patterns (never do these) +**Common shapes that work:** -- Open with "I hope this email finds you well" or "My name is X and I work at Y" -- Use "synergy," "leverage," "circle back," "best-in-class," "leading provider" -- Include HTML formatting, images, or multiple links -- Pitch your product in the subject line -- Use fake "Re:" or "Fwd:" subject lines -- Send identical templates with only {{FirstName}} swapped -- Ask for 30-minute calls in first touch -- Write "just checking in" follow-ups +- **Observation → Problem → Proof → Ask** — You noticed X, which usually means Y challenge. We helped Z with that. Interested? +- **Question → Value → Ask** — Struggling with X? We do Y. Company Z saw [result]. Worth a look? +- **Trigger → Insight → Ask** — Congrats on X. That usually creates Y challenge. We've helped similar companies with that. Curious? +- **Story → Bridge → Ask** — [Similar company] had [problem]. They [solved it this way]. Relevant to you? -## References +For the full catalog of frameworks with examples, see [frameworks.md](references/frameworks.md). -- [frameworks.md](references/frameworks.md) — All copywriting frameworks with B2B examples -- [subject-lines.md](references/subject-lines.md) — Subject line optimization rules and data -- [personalization.md](references/personalization.md) — 4-level system, research signals, 3-min method -- [follow-up-sequences.md](references/follow-up-sequences.md) — Cadence, angle rotation, breakup emails -- [benchmarks.md](references/benchmarks.md) — Performance data, expert methodologies, common mistakes +--- + +## Subject Lines + +Short, boring, internal-looking. The subject line's only job is to get the email opened — not to sell. + +- 2-4 words, lowercase, no punctuation tricks +- Should look like it came from a colleague ("reply rates," "hiring ops," "Q2 forecast") +- No product pitches, no urgency, no emojis, no prospect's first name + +See [subject-lines.md](references/subject-lines.md) for the full data. + +--- + +## Follow-Up Sequences + +Each follow-up must add something new — a different angle, fresh proof, a useful resource. Never "just checking in." + +- 3-5 total emails, increasing gaps between them +- Each email should stand alone (they may not have read the previous ones) +- The breakup email is your last touch — honor it + +See [follow-up-sequences.md](references/follow-up-sequences.md) for cadence, angle rotation, and breakup email templates. + +--- + +## Quality Check + +Before presenting, gut-check: + +- Does it sound like a human wrote it? (Read it aloud) +- Would YOU reply to this if you received it? +- Does every sentence serve the reader, not the sender? +- Is the personalization connected to the problem? +- Is there one clear, low-friction ask? + +--- + +## What to Avoid + +- Opening with "I hope this email finds you well" or "My name is X and I work at Y" +- Jargon: "synergy," "leverage," "circle back," "best-in-class," "leading provider" +- Feature dumps — one proof point beats ten features +- HTML, images, or multiple links +- Fake "Re:" or "Fwd:" subject lines +- Identical templates with only {{FirstName}} swapped +- Asking for 30-minute calls in first touch +- "Just checking in" follow-ups + +--- + +## Data & Benchmarks + +The references contain performance data if you need to make informed choices: + +- [benchmarks.md](references/benchmarks.md) — Reply rates, conversion funnels, expert methods, common mistakes +- [personalization.md](references/personalization.md) — 4-level personalization system, research signals +- [subject-lines.md](references/subject-lines.md) — Subject line data and optimization +- [follow-up-sequences.md](references/follow-up-sequences.md) — Cadence, angles, breakup emails +- [frameworks.md](references/frameworks.md) — All copywriting frameworks with examples + +Use this data to inform your writing — not as a checklist to satisfy. + +--- + +## Related Skills + +- **copywriting**: For landing pages and web copy +- **email-sequence**: For lifecycle/nurture email sequences (not cold outreach) +- **social-content**: For LinkedIn and social posts +- **product-marketing-context**: For establishing foundational positioning