CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

copywriting

Write rigorous, conversion-focused marketing copy for landing pages and emails. Enforces brief confirmation and strict no-fabrication rules.

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/copywriting/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

73%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body delivers a well-gated, clearly sequenced copywriting workflow with concrete directives and explicit checkpoints, scoring highly on actionability and workflow clarity. Its main weakness is redundancy: the principles are stated three times and two closing sections are filler, which costs token efficiency and slightly clutters otherwise good structure.

Suggestions

Delete the "When to Use" section ("This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview") — it is circular filler that adds no trigger or navigational value.

Consolidate the triple-stated principles (Operating Mode, Phase 3 Core Principles, Key Principles Summary) into the single Phase 3 statement and remove the redundant "Final Reminder" section.

Add one compact worked example (e.g., a sample brief bullet set or one headline alternative with its rationale) to close the gap between concrete directives and demonstrated output.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The core phases (context gathering, brief lock, page structure, deliverables) are tight and instruction-dense, but the body carries padded redundancy: "Clarity beats cleverness" is restated three times (Operating Mode, Phase 3, Key Principles Summary), and the "Final Reminder" and circular "When to Use" sections ("applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview") add no guidance. This is mostly efficient with sections that could be trimmed, matching anchor 3 rather than anchor 2 since the padding is a minority of the ~240 lines.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete directive guidance throughout: exact context-gathering checklists per category, a 4-6 bullet Copy Brief Summary format with an explicit confirmation prompt, labeled deliverable structure (Headline, Subheadline, CTAs, section copy), and "2-3 options" for headlines and CTAs each with a rationale. As an instruction-only skill the absence of code is not penalized; it misses anchor 5 only for lacking a worked example of a good vs. bad output.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced phases with explicit validation checkpoints: mandatory context gathering, a "Hard Gate" brief lock with "Do NOT proceed until confirmation is given", a confirm-or-correct feedback loop, and a "Hard Stop" completion-criteria checklist. This matches the anchor for clear sequencing with explicit validation steps, feedback loops, and checklists; there are no validation gaps for this non-destructive skill.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and none are needed; the body is a well-sectioned single file with clear headers and easy navigation. It does not reach anchor 5 because the ~240-line body exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill exception and trailing redundant sections (Key Principles Summary, Final Reminder, When to Use) leave minor organization gaps.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

61%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description states a clear, specific capability in third person with decent natural keywords, but it lacks any explicit "Use when..." trigger guidance, which caps completeness and weakens distinctiveness. Adding a trigger clause naming common user requests (e.g., "Use when writing or rewriting landing pages, emails, or other conversion copy") would lift it to the good-example tier.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause with concrete trigger phrases, e.g. "Use when the user asks for landing page copy, marketing emails, sales copy, or conversion-focused rewrites of marketing pages."

List 1-2 more concrete capabilities to strengthen specificity, such as "provides headline and CTA alternatives with rationale" or "structures full landing pages section by section".

Include common synonyms users would actually say ("copywriting", "sales copy", "email campaign copy") to broaden natural trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ("marketing copy") and one concrete action ("Write ... copy for landing pages and emails"), with "Enforces brief confirmation and strict no-fabrication rules" describing process discipline rather than additional capabilities. This matches the anchor for naming the domain and 1-2 concrete actions, not the level above, which requires several distinct listed actions.

3 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear (write conversion-focused marketing copy for landing pages and emails) but there is no "when" — no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps this dimension at 3. It is not anchor 2 because the "what" is specific, and not anchor 4 because a "when" clause is entirely absent rather than merely imprecise.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases like "marketing copy", "landing pages", "emails", and "conversion" give good keyword coverage a user would plausibly say. It falls short of anchor 5 because common synonyms like "copywriting", "sales copy", or "ad copy" are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Landing-page and email conversion copywriting is a mostly distinct niche with minor overlap risk against general writing or brand-voice skills. It is not anchor 5 because the absence of explicit trigger phrases makes it less distinguishable from adjacent writing skills at trigger time.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Path

skills/copywriting/SKILL.md

Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.