Here are 10 things customers actually said: [paste quotes]. Using only words that appear in these quotes, write three positioning statements: one for someone who doesn't know the category exists, one for someone comparing options, one for someone who tried a competitor and left. No adjectives that aren't in the quotes.
Use when your positioning sounds like every competitor's.
Why it works it forbids your own vocabulary, which is where the sameness lives; the constraint does the creative work.
Marketing
Objection Stack
Product: [describe]. Audience: [who]. List the objections this audience will have, in the order they'll occur to them while scrolling. For each: the section that answers it, and the shortest honest proof I could put there. Mark any objection we can't answer as "don't claim" — I'd rather lose the lead than lie.
Use when writing a landing page and the draft is all features.
Why it works it orders content by the reader's doubts rather than the seller's enthusiasm, which is what makes a page scannable in the right sequence.
Marketing
Ad Variants That Argue Differently
Product: [describe]. Write five ad variants, each making a different argument: (1) saves time, (2) removes a specific annoyance, (3) social proof, (4) cost of not doing it, (5) a direct comparison. Same length, same format, under [character limit]. Then tell me which one needs proof I don't have.
Use when "make 10 versions" produced 10 synonyms.
Why it works each variant is anchored to a different argument, so the test measures a hypothesis instead of a wording.
Marketing
Sequence by Doubt Stage
Product: [describe]. Build a 5-email sequence where each email answers a different doubt, in order: does this apply to me, do I believe it works, is it worth the money, what if it doesn't work, why now. Subject line + 80-word body each. No fake urgency, no invented statistics.
Use when building an email sequence and every email says "buy now".
Why it works mapping each message to a stage of doubt stops the sequence from repeating itself and gives each email a job.
Marketing
Competitor Claim Audit
Here are claims from competitors' pages: [paste]. For each: what it literally says, what evidence would be needed to support it, and whether the page shows that evidence. Then tell me which claim nobody in this list can support — that's usually the space worth occupying.
Use when you need to know what's actually defensible in your category.
Why it works it separates what competitors claim from what they can support, which is where the honest differentiation usually hides.
Marketing
Feature → Outcome Ladder
Features: [list]. Build a table: feature → what it lets someone do → what that changes for them → the proof I'd need to claim it. If the proof column is empty, mark the row "don't say this". Keep the language plain; no "empower", "seamless", "unlock".
Use when you have a feature list and need copy that isn't a feature list.
Why it works the proof column is mandatory, so the ladder can't float into aspirational claims with nothing under them.
Marketing
Launch Post That Doesn't Oversell
I'm announcing: [what]. Write a launch post that opens with what this does, then states plainly what it doesn't do yet, then who it's for and who should wait. Under 300 words. No "excited to announce", no "game-changer", no imaginary testimonials.
Use when announcing something real and small.
Why it works starting with what it doesn't do sets an honest frame, and readers trust a limitation more than a superlative.
Marketing
SEO Brief That Isn't Keyword Soup
Target query: "[query]". Searcher's situation: [who, what they've tried]. Write a brief with: the one question the page must answer in the first screen, 5 headings phrased as the reader's questions in order, what each section must contain to be worth its space, and what this page must NOT repeat from [existing page]. No keyword density instructions.
Use when briefing a writer on a page that must rank and be worth reading.
Why it works it makes the brief answer the reader's question at each heading, which is the only version of keyword coverage that survives a quality review.
Marketing
Recency Rule With a Stale Tag
On [topic], give me only claims you can attribute to something published after [year]. Format each as: the claim, who says it, when, and what kind of source it is. If the best support you have is older than that, do not drop it and do not dress it up — write STALE next to it and say how old. Finish with the one belief in this area most likely to have changed since then, and the check that would settle it.
Use when you need market claims that are actually current and the model keeps reaching for whatever it knows.
Why it works naming the behaviour at the boundary stops old evidence being silently substituted for new.
Marketing
Replace My Vague Words
Here is my brief: [paste, keeping words like professional, engaging, concise, high quality, robust]. Take each vague word in turn. Give me the three most likely things I actually mean, and for each one the test a reader could run to tell whether a draft meets it. Then rewrite the brief with the measures in place. If a word has no testable meaning at all, leave it in, mark it UNMEASURABLE, and tell me what decision it is hiding.
Use when a creative or campaign brief contains words nobody could check a draft against.
Why it works adjectives become measures with tests, and flagging the unmeasurable ones stops false precision.
Marketing
Rules the Model Cannot Guess
Before you write anything for [brand or team], here are the rules that are not obvious: [words we never use], [claims we cannot make], [how we refer to the product], [what every piece must include]. Turn that into a checklist, show it back to me, and wait for my edits. Then write [deliverable]. Afterwards, mark which rule each paragraph is satisfying, and flag any sentence where two rules pulled in opposite directions. Do not resolve those conflicts yourself.
Use when the output is technically competent and wrong for your organisation.
Why it works the rules that live in your head have to become checkable items, because a role description cannot carry a house style.
Marketing
Note Shape, Not Note Voice
Here are three posts from [platform] that did well in [niche]: [paste]. Ignore their topic and their wording completely. For each, describe the order of moves it makes: how it opens, when it states the payoff, where the proof sits, how it closes, what it asks for at the end. Then tell me the order all three share. Write a post on [my topic] using that order, with my facts and my words. Finish by listing the moves you used, in sequence, so I can check the structure held.
Use when you want your posts to read like the ones that work in your niche without sounding like a copy.
Why it works structure transfers cleanly and voice does not, so imitating the order of moves buys readability without the plagiarism.
Marketing
First Line Earns the Scroll
Post body: [paste]. Write five opening lines, each promising something different and specific: a result, a mistake, a comparison, a number I actually have, a question I can answer. For each one, say in a line what the reader now expects to get. Then mark any line whose promise the body does not keep, and rewrite that line to promise only what is there. No cliffhangers and no most-people-get-this-wrong openings.
Use when the post is fine and nobody opens it.
Why it works five openings that promise different things turn the first line into a decision about what the piece is for, instead of a warm-up.
Marketing
Page Outline That Answers in the Buyer's Order
Product: [what it is, in one sentence]. Buyer: [role and situation]. What they use today instead: [current workaround, including "nothing"]. Build a page outline as a table: block, the question it answers for a first-time visitor, the copy in plain sentences, and the proof that block needs (a number I can source, a named customer, a demo, or a stated limit). Order the blocks so a stranger can answer "what is this", "is it for me", "what does it replace", "can I believe it", and "what happens if I click" without scrolling back. Mark every place I owe you a fact I have not supplied, and do not write a placeholder as if it were evidence.
Use when you have a landing page to write and no structure agreed.
Why it works it fixes the order of questions a stranger asks, so every block has a job instead of a mood.
Marketing
Claims I Can Actually Defend
Here is my copy: [paste]. Extract every claim a buyer could act on — including implied ones, comparisons, superlatives, and anything about speed, results, safety, or who it is for. Put them in a table: the claim as written, whether it is factual, comparative, or opinion, what evidence would substantiate it, and whether I currently have that evidence (`yes, I can show it`, `partly`, `no`). Rewrite only the `no` and `partly` rows so the sentence still means something useful without the claim — or tell me to delete the line. Flag any place where the copy implies a result that depends on the customer's own effort. End with one line: the claim I should remove first, and the evidence I would need before publishing any of them.
Use when ad or page copy is drafted and about to be approved.
Why it works a substantiation column turns "sounds fine" into "can I show this", which is the only review that survives contact with a complaint.
Marketing
Follow-Up That Adds Instead of Nudging
First message I sent: [paste]. What I know about their situation: [two or three verified facts]. Write a two-message follow-up sequence. Message one: adds one thing the first message did not contain — a useful specific, a relevant example, a direct answer to the objection their silence most likely means — in under 80 words, no guilt, no "circling back". Message two: closes the loop honestly by giving them a clean way to say no. After both, state my stop rule: the exact condition under which I stop contacting this person, and what I record so nobody else on my team restarts the same sequence.
Use when a first message got no reply and you are tempted to write "just bumping this".
Why it works a stop rule and a new-information requirement prevent the sequence from becoming repetition with a different subject line.
Every prompt assumes you will replace the brackets. If you copy one unchanged, you have
borrowed someone else’s brief.