ben/hvac-marketing-skills
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

docs: rewrite cold email skill guide with human-first approach

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Valentin Manes 2026-02-17 07:22:05 +01:00
parent d8df68677f
commit b260631f47
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: A7C69445E2E11276
1 changed files with 121 additions and 129 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

250
skills/cold-email/SKILL.md
View file

@ -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