CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

copywriting

When the user wants to write, rewrite, or improve marketing copy for any page — including homepage, landing pages, pricing pages, feature pages, about pages, or product pages. Also use when the user says "write copy for," "improve this copy," "rewrite this page," "marketing copy," "headline help," or "CTA copy." For email copy, see email-sequence. For popup copy, see popup-cro.

64

Quality

81%

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

The canonical home for this skill is copywriting in alirezarezvani/claude-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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 is well-organized, concrete, and grounded in actionable formulas, examples, and a scorer-driven workflow, but it is overweight for a SKILL.md due to repeated principles and three overlapping output/communication sections. More critically, the three bundle files it references (the headline scorer script and both reference documents) are missing from the bundle, breaking both its executable validation step and its progressive-disclosure structure.

Suggestions

Ship the referenced bundle files — scripts/headline_scorer.py, references/copy-frameworks.md, and references/natural-transitions.md — or remove the references and the 'Score every headline candidate' mandate, since all three currently point to nonexistent paths.

Deduplicate the principles sections: merge 'Copywriting Principles,' 'Writing Style Rules,' and 'Best Practices' into one section, and collapse 'Output Format,' 'Output Artifacts,' and 'Communication' into a single deliverables contract.

Move the detailed headline formula bank, CTA lists, and page-specific guidance tables into references/ so the SKILL.md body stays a lean overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep references.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~295-line body is mostly tight, directive bullets, but principles repeat across sections: "Specificity Over Vagueness" reappears as "Specific over vague" in Writing Style Rules, Output Format / Output Artifacts / Communication all restate the deliverables-and-annotations contract, and Be Direct duplicates the clarity principles. This fits anchor 3 ('mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened') rather than anchor 2, since the repetition is structural overlap rather than padded fluff or explanations of concepts Claude already knows.

3 / 5

Actionability

The guidance is highly concrete: headline formula templates ("{Achieve outcome} without {pain point}"), a weak/strong CTA list with a formula, a worked ❌/✅ example, and copy-paste commands for the bundled scorer ("python3 scripts/headline_scorer.py \"Ship dashboards in minutes, not sprints\""). It falls short of anchor 5 because the mandated executable step ("Score every headline candidate with the bundled scorer") depends on scripts/headline_scorer.py, which is not present in the bundle, so the primary code path cannot actually run as shipped.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear sequence is present: check product-marketing-context.md, gather context (page purpose, audience, offer, traffic), draft, score 5-10 headline candidates, present top 2-3 with scores, then run copy-editing on the draft. Validation checkpoints exist (the scorer's sub-60 gate, the Quick Quality Check checklist, the copy-editing pass). It is not a 5 because the end-to-end flow must be synthesized from scattered sections rather than stated as one ordered process, and there is no error-recovery loop (e.g., what to do when all candidates score below 60).

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

References are well-signaled and one level deep ("For comprehensive headline formulas: See [references/copy-frameworks.md]"), and the bundle layout on paper matches the rubric's good pattern — but scored against the actual bundle, none of the three referenced files (scripts/headline_scorer.py, references/copy-frameworks.md, references/natural-transitions.md) exist, so the disclosure chain is broken. Additionally, a substantial amount of reference-grade material (headline formulas, CTA lists, page-specific guidance tables) is inlined in the body. This sits between anchor 2's broken/inlined-content pattern and anchor 4's well-placed structure.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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.

A strong description that clearly and explicitly states what the skill does, when to use it with natural trigger phrases, and where its boundaries lie via redirects to adjacent skills. The only improvement area is broader synonym coverage for common user phrasings like 'sales copy' or 'conversion copy.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — "write, rewrite, or improve marketing copy" — and comprehensively enumerates the page types covered ("homepage, landing pages, pricing pages, feature pages, about pages, or product pages") plus deliverable-level triggers ("headline help," "CTA copy"). Coverage within its stated scope is comprehensive with no significant gaps, matching the anchor for multiple specific concrete actions; it is not a 4 because no meaningful capability in the domain is left unspecified.

5 / 5

Completeness

Both questions are answered explicitly: the 'what' ("write, rewrite, or improve marketing copy for any page") and the 'when' with concrete trigger phrases ("When the user wants to..." and "Also use when the user says..."). This matches the anchor 5 example structure almost exactly; a 4 would require the 'when' to be less explicit, which it is not.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good keyword coverage with quoted natural phrases users would actually say: "write copy for," "improve this copy," "rewrite this page," "marketing copy," "headline help," "CTA copy." It is not a 5 because a few common natural synonyms are missing (e.g., "sales copy," "conversion copy," "web copy," "website copy"), which the anchor for 'a few natural terms missing' describes exactly; it clearly exceeds anchor 3's bar of partial keyword coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (page marketing copy) with distinct triggers, and it actively reduces conflict risk with explicit boundary redirects: "For email copy, see email-sequence. For popup copy, see popup-cro." Minor overlap with copy-editing exists, but the description's scope (writing new page copy) is distinct; it fits anchor 5's 'clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk' rather than anchor 4's 'minor overlap risk.'

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

relative_links

Relative link issues: 3 missing

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 8 missing

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository

alirezarezvani/claude-skills

Path

.gemini/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.