* feat: v2.0 skill renames and CRO consolidation BREAKING CHANGE: Users must reinstall skills after this update. ## Skill Renames (16) - ab-test-setup → ab-testing - analytics-tracking → analytics - aso-audit → aso - competitor-alternatives → competitors - email-sequence → emails - free-tool-strategy → free-tools - launch-strategy → launch - onboarding-cro → onboarding - paywall-upgrade-cro → paywalls - popup-cro → popups - pricing-strategy → pricing - product-marketing-context → product-marketing - referral-program → referrals - schema-markup → schema - signup-flow-cro → signup - social-content → social ## Consolidations (1) - page-cro + form-cro → cro (form content in references/form.md) ## Why 2.0? - Shorter, cleaner skill names - Consistent naming (no -strategy, -setup, -cro suffixes) - All cross-references updated across 100+ files Total skills: 40 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): update evals for renamed skills, fix validate script, clear warnings - Update 32 evals.json files to reference new skill names (page-cro → cro, product-marketing-context → product-marketing, etc.) — these were missed in the initial v2.0 rename pass since only SKILL.md and marketplace.json were updated. - Fix validate-skills.sh: replace GNU-only `head -n -1` with portable awk so frontmatter extraction works on macOS. - Move Copy Editing Checklist (56 lines) to references/checklist.md to bring copy-editing SKILL.md under the 500-line limit (508 → 457). - Add "see X" pointers to marketing-psychology description for skill discovery (cro, pricing, copywriting). - Update skill-request.yml issue template placeholder (page-cro → cro). All 40 skills now pass validation with zero warnings. * fix(v2.0): add evals for 8 missing skills, strip stale frontmatter from cro/form.md Adds 48 new eval cases (6 per skill) for skills that previously had no evals: aso, co-marketing, community-marketing, competitor-profiling, directory-submissions, image, lead-magnets, video. All 40 skills now have eval coverage (251 total cases). Strips leftover frontmatter from skills/cro/references/form.md — it was inherited from the old form-cro SKILL.md before consolidation. Reference files don't need frontmatter. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): rename paid-ads → ads One more v2.0 simplification — drops the redundant 'paid-' qualifier. Updates the skill directory, SKILL.md frontmatter, evals.json, README skill table, the v2.0 rename table in VERSIONS.md (now 17 renames), and all cross-references in related skills (ad-creative, aso, competitor-profiling, customer-research, lead-magnets, marketing-ideas) plus the tools/integrations guides. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): bump SKILL.md frontmatter version to 2.0.0 for all 40 skills VERSIONS.md was already updated to 2.0.0 but the metadata.version field inside each SKILL.md was still on 1.x. That mismatch would have caused the update-check flow to perpetually report 'update available' since it compares VERSIONS.md against local SKILL.md metadata versions. Caught by codex review (P1). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): add legacy product-marketing-context.md filename fallback Before this fix, users upgrading from v1.x who had a `product-marketing-context.md` file would lose automatic context loading — every skill only checked the new `product-marketing.md` filename. Now all 40 skills also accept the legacy filename (in either `.agents/` or `.claude/`), and the README migration command covers both legacy and current filenames. Caught by codex review (P1 + P2). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): re-sort README skills table alphabetically, fix ads box width The skills table had a few entries out of alphabetical order from the renames (co-marketing was after cold-email, ads was at the renamed position). Re-sorted alphabetically per sync-skills.js. Also padded the 'ads' cell in the ASCII flow diagram to keep the box width consistent. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(v2.0): document folder cleanup on upgrade, stop sync-skills from re-adding skills array README upgrade guide now includes: - A clear cleanup step for stale v1.x skill folders (renamed + consolidated) so users don't end up with both old and new folders side-by-side after upgrading - The full v1 to v2 rename map for reference - Existing product-marketing-context.md migration steps (preserved) sync-skills.js no longer (re-)introduces a `skills` array on marketplace.json -- Claude Code's plugin schema discovers skills via the `skills/` directory, and the explicit array was failing validation. The script now refreshes the description count and strips the stale array if present. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
7.0 KiB
name, description, metadata
| name | description | metadata | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| cold-email | Write B2B cold emails and follow-up sequences that get replies. Use when the user wants to write cold outreach emails, prospecting emails, cold email campaigns, sales development emails, or SDR emails. Also use when the user mentions "cold outreach," "prospecting email," "outbound email," "email to leads," "reach out to prospects," "sales email," "follow-up email sequence," "nobody's replying to my emails," or "how do I write a cold email." Covers subject lines, opening lines, body copy, CTAs, personalization, and multi-touch follow-up sequences. For warm/lifecycle email sequences, see emails. For sales collateral beyond emails, see sales-enablement. |
|
Cold Email Writing
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.
Before Writing
Check for product marketing context first:
If .agents/product-marketing.md exists (or .claude/product-marketing.md, or the legacy product-marketing-context.md filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
Understand the situation (ask if not provided):
- Who are you writing to? — Role, company, why them specifically
- What do you want? — The outcome (meeting, reply, intro, demo)
- What's the value? — The specific problem you solve for people like them
- What's your proof? — A result, case study, or credibility signal
- Any research signals? — Funding, hiring, LinkedIn posts, company news, tech stack changes
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.
Writing Principles
Write like a peer, not a vendor
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 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 for the 4-level system and research signals.
Lead with their world, not yours
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.
One ask, low friction
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.
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")
Structure
There's no single right structure. Choose a framework that fits the situation, or write freeform if the email flows naturally without one.
Common shapes that work:
- 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?
For the full catalog of frameworks with examples, see frameworks.md.
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 for the full data.
Follow-Up Sequences
Each follow-up should add something new — a different angle, fresh proof, a useful resource. "Just checking in" gives the reader no reason to respond.
- 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 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 — Reply rates, conversion funnels, expert methods, common mistakes
- personalization.md — 4-level personalization system, research signals
- subject-lines.md — Subject line data and optimization
- follow-up-sequences.md — Cadence, angles, breakup emails
- 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
- emails: For lifecycle/nurture email sequences (not cold outreach)
- social: For LinkedIn and social posts
- product-marketing: For establishing foundational positioning
- revops: For lead scoring, routing, and pipeline management