Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

copywriting(文案写作)

用于辅助文档、README、Markdown、说明文和内容稿件的整理与改写。它适合让 Agent 提炼结构、补齐章节、统一术语、检查链接或把零散材料整理成可读文档。使用时应保留项目已有事实、命令和路径,不要把未确认的信息写成确定结论;涉及对外文案时,还需要控制语气,避免过度营销或夸大能力。

copywriting 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为执行命令;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 62,819。

总安装 326周安装 14GitHub Stars 1下载 114核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:copywriting(文案写作)
来源仓库:https://github.com/hungv47/marketing-skills
仓库路径:skills/copywriting
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/marketing-skills --skill copywriting
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/marketing-skills --skill copywriting

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

用于辅助文档、README 和内容稿件的整理与改写。适合提炼结构、统一术语或补齐章节内容。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。使用时需保留已有事实,避免写成确定结论。涉及对外文案时应控制语气,避免过度营销表述。

copywriting 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/copywriting

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/marketing-skills --skill copywriting;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要执行命令,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

copywriting 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/marketing-skills --skill copywriting。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

copywriting 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

copywriting 需要什么权限?

权限级别是执行命令。安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/marketing-skills --skill copywriting 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

copywriting 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

copywriting 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 326 次,近一周安装 14 次,下载 114 次,GitHub 1 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

copywriting 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要执行命令,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 不能接受 Skill 在你机器上执行命令的人。
  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
copywriting

文案写作 · 本页

3261执行命令未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Copywriting — Orchestrator

*Communication — Horizontal. Coordinates specialized sub-agents to produce craft-quality copy with annotations, alternatives, and quantitative evaluation.*

Core Question: "Is every key line visual, falsifiable, and uniquely ours?"

Philosophy

Copy frameworks (PAS, 3-Question Test, CTA formula) are proven tools — not mandatory templates. A skilled agent may combine frameworks or break a guideline when the extra words earn their place. The test is: does this stop the scroll and move the reader? This orchestrator dispatches specialist agents for each concern, then a critic agent ensures every key line meets the bar.

Inputs Required

  • Brief: what to write (headline, hook, CTA, tagline, subject line, or full-page copy)
  • Context: audience, product, awareness stage (from research/icp-research.md, research/product-context.md, or user-provided)

Output

  • Inline annotations + alternatives on key lines (when called by another skill)
  • .agents/mkt/content/[slug].copy.md (for standalone full-page copy tasks)

Quality Gate

Before delivering, the critic agent verifies:

  • Every key line passes the Three-Question Test: visual? falsifiable? uniquely ours?
  • Rubric score averages ≥3.5 across V/F/U for all key lines
  • Every key line passes the Competitor Swap Test (swap in competitor name — if it still works, rewrite)
  • 3-5 variations generated per key line, best selected with top 2-3 presented as alternatives
  • Every key line annotated: rule that drove the choice, cut alternative, rubric score
  • CTA follows formula: [action verb] + [what they get] (not "Learn More" or "Click Here")
  • Every headline/hook contains concrete nouns or specific numbers (no abstract "better," "innovative," "leading")

Chain Position

Horizontal — called by content-create, lp-optimization, imc-plan. Can run standalone. Re-run triggers: When brand voice changes, when A/B test results suggest a different angle, or when key lines need fresh variations.

Skill Deference

  • Need a full content asset (carousel, thread, email, video)? → Use content-create
  • Content reads as AI-generated? → Run humanize after
  • Diagnosing a live page's conversion problem? → Use lp-optimization
  • Optimizing for search/AI citations? → Coordinate with seo

Agent Manifest

AgentLayerFileFocus
Hook Agent1 (parallel)agents/hook-agent.mdHeadlines, hooks, taglines, subject lines — 3-5 variations with 3Q scoring
Body Agent1 (parallel)agents/body-agent.mdProblem, Solution, How It Works sections
CTA Agent1 (parallel)agents/cta-agent.mdCTA variations per placement with risk reversal
Social Proof Agent1 (parallel)agents/social-proof-agent.mdTestimonials, stats, logos, credibility signals
Variant Agent1.5 (post-merge)agents/variant-agent.mdA/B alternatives for key sections
Voice Agent2 (sequential)agents/voice-agent.mdClarity + brand voice consistency, AI slop removal
Psychology Agent2 (sequential)agents/psychology-agent.mdSo What, Prove It, Specificity, Emotion passes
Zero-Risk Agent2 (sequential)agents/zero-risk-agent.mdBarrier removal, guarantees, exit grace
Critic Agent2 (final)agents/critic-agent.mdRubric scoring, 3Q test, annotation, PASS/FAIL

Shared References (read by multiple agents)

  • references/headline-formulas.md — Headline formula catalog (used by hook-agent)
  • references/page-sections.md — Page section specs and testimonial criteria (used by body-agent, social-proof-agent)

Routing Logic

Classify the task, then follow the matching route.

Route A: Single Key Line

When: Brief asks for a headline, hook, CTA, tagline, or subject line — not a full page.

1. Pre-dispatch: Gather context (Step 0 below)
2. Dispatch ONE agent:
   - Hook/headline/tagline/subject line → hook-agent
   - CTA → cta-agent
3. Dispatch: critic-agent (on the single agent's output)
4. If critic returns FAIL → re-dispatch the original agent with feedback (max 2 cycles)
5. Deliver annotated key lines

Note: Route A skips variant-agent. Hook-agent and cta-agent already generate 3-5 variations internally with rubric scoring. Variant-agent is designed for full-page copy where cross-section A/B alternatives are needed.

Route B: Full-Page Copy

When: Brief asks for landing page copy, full-page copy, or multiple sections.

1. Pre-dispatch: Gather context (Step 0 below)
2. LAYER 1 — Dispatch IN PARALLEL:
   - hook-agent
   - body-agent
   - cta-agent
   - social-proof-agent
3. MERGE: Assemble Layer 1 outputs into page structure
4. Dispatch: variant-agent (on merged output)
5. LAYER 2 — Dispatch SEQUENTIALLY:
   - voice-agent (receives merged + varianted output)
   - psychology-agent (receives voice-agent output)
   - zero-risk-agent (receives psychology-agent output)
6. Dispatch: critic-agent (receives zero-risk-agent output)
7. If critic returns FAIL → re-dispatch named agent(s) with feedback (max 2 cycles)
8. Deliver final artifact

Route C: Called by Another Skill

When: Invoked by content-create, lp-optimization, or imc-plan for inline copy work.

1. Pre-dispatch: Read context from calling skill's artifacts
2. Dispatch the relevant Layer 1 agent(s) based on what the caller needs:
   - Headline/hook → hook-agent
   - Body sections → body-agent
   - CTAs → cta-agent
   - Social proof → social-proof-agent
3. Dispatch: critic-agent
4. Return annotated output to the calling skill

Step 0: Pre-Dispatch Context Gathering

Before dispatching any agent, the orchestrator gathers context that ALL agents will need.

Product Context Check

Check for research/product-context.md. If available, read for product details, voice adjectives, and accuracy constraints. If research/product-context.md or research/icp-research.md date fields are older than 30 days, warn the user and recommend re-running icp-research before proceeding. This is a soft gate — proceed if the user confirms, but note "stale ICP data" in the artifact header. Tip: /navigate status (from meta-skills) gives a single-pass freshness report across all upstream artifacts.

Language

Default: English. If the user specifies another language, note it in pre-writing and pass to all agents. All agent instructions are currently optimized for English copy — other languages may need adapted idioms and cultural references.

Optional Artifacts

ArtifactSourceBenefit
icp-research.mdicp-researchVoC language for copy
product-context.mdicp-researchProduct details, voice adjectives
imc-plan.mdimc-planAngle, awareness stage, channel context
mkt/content-research.mdcontent-research (research-skills)Audience language map, winning hook patterns, competitor positioning gaps — directly informs hook and voice agents

Pre-Writing Framework

Answer these 4 questions before dispatching. Pass the answers to every agent as the pre-writing input:

  1. Who am I talking to? What do they currently believe? What language do they use?
  2. What should they believe after reading this? What's the one shift?
  3. What can I say that nobody else can? What's our unique proof?
  4. Where is the traffic coming from? (Ad, search, email, social, direct) — determines what they already know and expect.

If research/icp-research.md exists, pull VoC quotes and pain language. Write how the buyer talks, not how the brand talks.

If .agents/mkt/content-research.md exists, pull the Audience Language Map (brand language → audience language pairs) and Winning Patterns (hook types that are performing in this niche). Feed these into pre-writing as research_language and research_patterns for hook-agent and voice-agent.


Dispatch Protocol

How to spawn a sub-agent

For each agent dispatched below, use the Agent tool with a prompt constructed as follows:

  1. Read the agent instruction file (e.g., agents/hook-agent.md) — include its FULL content in the Agent prompt
  2. Append the brief and pre-writing context after the instructions
  3. Resolve file paths to absolute: replace relative paths with absolute paths rooted at this skill's directory. Example: if this skill is at /Users/you/skills/copywriting/, then references/headline-formulas.md becomes /Users/you/skills/copywriting/references/headline-formulas.md. Tell the agent: "Read the reference file at [absolute path] for domain knowledge."
  4. Pass upstream artifacts by content, not path: the orchestrator reads research/product-context.md, research/icp-research.md, and .agents/mkt/content-research.md (if it exists) FIRST, then includes relevant excerpts (VoC quotes, voice adjectives, pain language, research-backed audience language and winning patterns) in the pre-writing object. Sub-agents should NOT read artifact files directly — the orchestrator curates what they need.
  5. If feedback exists (from a critic FAIL cycle), append it at the end of the prompt with the header "## Critic Feedback — Address Every Point"

Single-agent fallback

If multi-agent dispatch is unavailable (no Agent tool, single-agent runtime, or context constraints), execute each agent's instructions sequentially in-context:

  • Layer 1: run each agent's domain instructions one at a time, writing each section
  • Layer 2: apply each refinement pass to the full document in order
  • Critic: self-evaluate using the critic-agent's rubric and quality gate

The output quality should be equivalent — the multi-agent pattern optimizes for parallelism and focus, not capability.


Layer 1: Parallel Section Writers

Spawn the following agents IN PARALLEL (multiple Agent tool calls in a single message). For each agent, follow the Dispatch Protocol above.

AgentInstruction FilePass These InputsReference Files to Resolve
Hook Agentagents/hook-agent.mdbrief + pre-writingreferences/headline-formulas.md
Body Agentagents/body-agent.mdbrief + pre-writingreferences/page-sections.md
CTA Agentagents/cta-agent.mdbrief + pre-writing—
Social Proof Agentagents/social-proof-agent.mdbrief + pre-writing + available proof pointsreferences/page-sections.md

For single key line tasks (Route A): Dispatch only the relevant agent, not all four.


Merge Step

After all Layer 1 agents return, assemble their outputs into the page structure.

Section Order (full-page copy)

  1. Hero — Hook agent's recommended headline + subheadline + CTA agent's hero CTA
  2. Social Proof Bar — Social proof agent's bar element
  3. Problem — Body agent's Problem section
  4. Solution — Body agent's Solution section
  5. How It Works — Body agent's How It Works section
  6. Testimonials — Social proof agent's testimonials
  7. Key Stats — Social proof agent's stats (if applicable)
  8. Final CTA — CTA agent's final CTA + risk reversal

Assembly Rules

The merge is deterministic assembly, not creative synthesis. Slot each agent's output into the template by ownership:

SectionOwner AgentContent Source
Headline + SubheadlineHook AgentRecommended hook + subheadline from hook-agent output
Hero CTACTA AgentHero CTA from cta-agent output
Social Proof BarSocial Proof AgentBar element from social-proof-agent output
ProblemBody AgentProblem section from body-agent output
SolutionBody AgentSolution section from body-agent output
How It WorksBody AgentHow It Works section from body-agent output
TestimonialsSocial Proof AgentTestimonials from social-proof-agent output
Mid-Page CTACTA AgentMid-page CTA from cta-agent output
Key StatsSocial Proof AgentStats from social-proof-agent output
Final CTA + Risk ReversalCTA AgentFinal CTA + risk reversal from cta-agent output

Conflict Resolution

  • Each agent owns specific sections (table above). If two agents mention the same fact (e.g., both hook and social-proof reference "12,000 users"), keep the version from the section owner.
  • If hook-agent's headline contradicts body-agent's problem framing, the orchestrator adjusts the body to align with the hook — the hook is the anchor because it's what the reader sees first.

After Merge: Variant Agent

Dispatch the variant-agent with the assembled document as upstream. It returns A/B alternatives for key sections. Variant alternatives are appended to the artifact (not replacing originals) — they're testable options, not replacements.


Layer 2: Sequential Craft Refiners

Dispatch these agents ONE AT A TIME, IN ORDER using the Dispatch Protocol above. Each receives the previous agent's full output as the upstream field.

voice-agent → psychology-agent → zero-risk-agent → critic-agent
StepAgentInstruction FileReceives
1Voice Agentagents/voice-agent.mdMerged + varianted document
2Psychology Agentagents/psychology-agent.mdVoice agent's output
3Zero-Risk Agentagents/zero-risk-agent.mdPsychology agent's output
4Critic Agentagents/critic-agent.mdZero-risk agent's output

Each agent returns the full document with their edits applied + a change log.


Critic Gate

The critic agent returns one of two verdicts:

PASS

The copy meets all quality standards. Deliver the critic's annotated output as the final artifact.

FAIL

The critic returns specific failures with:

  • Which lines failed and on which dimension
  • Specific fix instructions
  • Which agent to re-dispatch

Rewrite loop:

  1. Read the critic's failure report
  2. Re-dispatch ONLY the named agent(s) with the critic's feedback attached as the feedback input
  3. Run the modified output back through the critic
  4. Maximum 2 rewrite cycles. After 2 failures, deliver the copy with the critic's annotations and flag to the user: "Copy scored [X] — manual review recommended on [specific lines]."

Artifact Template

---
skill: copywriting
version: 1
date: [today's date]
status: draft
---

# Copy: [Title / Brief Description]

**Date:** [today]
**Skill:** copywriting
**Audience:** [who]
**Awareness Stage:** [stage]
**Traffic Source:** [where they're coming from]

## Pre-Writing

1. **Talking to:** [audience + current belief]
2. **Shift to:** [desired belief after reading]
3. **Only we can say:** [unique proof/angle]
4. **Traffic context:** [what they already know]

## Key Lines

### [Line Type: Headline / Hook / CTA / Tagline / Subject Line]

**Selected:** "[winning line]"
  Rule: [which principle]. Score: V:[n] F:[n] U:[n].
  Cut alternative: "[runner-up]" — [why cut].

**Alternative A:** "[second option]"
  Rule: [principle]. Score: V:[n] F:[n] U:[n].

**Alternative B:** "[third option]"
  Rule: [principle]. Score: V:[n] F:[n] U:[n].

## [Additional sections for full-page copy — Hero, Problem, Solution, etc.]

## A/B Variants
[Variant agent's alternatives with hypotheses and test priority]

> On re-run: rename existing artifact to `[slug].copy.v[N].md` and create new with incremented version.

Next Step

Run humanize to refine voice and compress. Run lp-optimization if this copy is for a landing page. Run attribution to track performance.


Worked Example — Full-Page Copy (Route B)

Brief: Landing page for StatusZero, a tool that replaces standups with async status updates. Audience: Engineering managers at 50-200 person companies, problem aware. Traffic: LinkedIn ads (cold).

Step 0: Pre-Dispatch

  1. Talking to: EMs who feel buried in status overhead but think it's part of managing.
  2. Shift to: Status updates are a solvable problem, not a cost of doing business.
  3. Only we can say: Internal data shows 12 hrs/week lost to status theater.
  4. Traffic: LinkedIn ad click — cold, haven't searched, hook must interrupt.

Layer 1: Parallel Dispatch

→ Hook agent returns 5 headline variations, recommends: "Your team loses 12 hours a week to status updates nobody reads." (V:5 F:5 U:4) → Body agent returns Problem (status theater pain), Solution (async updates), How It Works (3 steps) → CTA agent returns hero CTA ("See how teams ship without status theater →"), mid-page, and final CTAs with risk reversal → Social proof agent returns logo bar (4 tech companies), 2 testimonials with metrics, key stat

Merge (orchestrator assembles)

Slots Layer 1 outputs into template: Hero → Social Proof Bar → Problem → Solution → How It Works → Testimonials → Final CTA

Dispatch: Variant Agent

Receives merged document. Returns A/B alternatives: → Hero variant B: "I cut meetings 80%. Output doubled." (tests story hook vs. data hook) → Final CTA variant B: "Try StatusZero free — no credit card, cancel anytime" (tests specificity vs. risk-first)

Layer 2: Sequential Dispatch

→ Voice agent receives merged + varianted doc. Fixes 3 AI patterns, adjusts tone to "direct, technical." Returns modified doc + change log. → Psychology agent receives voice output. Adds "which means..." bridges to 2 features, strengthens emotion in problem section. Returns modified doc + change log. → Zero-risk agent receives psychology output. Adds "No credit card required" near hero CTA, "Cancel anytime" near final CTA. Returns modified doc + change log.

Dispatch: Critic Agent → PASS

Receives zero-risk output. Scores all key lines. All average ≥3.5. Annotated and delivered.


Agent Files

Sub-Agent Instructions (agents/)

Shared References (references/)

Page-Specific Guidance

PageKey Principle
HomepageWhat you do in one sentence. Primary use case, not every feature.
Landing PageOne goal, one CTA. Match headline to traffic source. Remove nav.
PricingLead with value, not price. Anchor with most popular plan.
FeatureLead with outcome ("Track time in one click"), not feature name.
AboutFounding story. What you believe. Team photos + real context.

Anti-Patterns

Skipping the pre-writing — Dispatching agents without answering the 4 pre-writing questions. Every agent needs this context to write relevant copy.

Dispatching all agents for a single headline — Route A exists for a reason. A single key line only needs one Layer 1 agent + critic.

Ignoring the critic's FAIL — If the critic fails the copy, the orchestrator MUST re-dispatch. Delivering failed copy to the user breaks the quality contract.

Re-dispatching the wrong agent — The critic specifies which agent to re-dispatch. Read the failure report carefully.

More than 2 rewrite cycles — Diminishing returns. After 2 cycles, deliver with annotations and let the user decide.

平台分布

Codex

33.2%
按下载量换算38

Claude

30.96%
按下载量换算35

Cursor

19.18%
按下载量换算22

Gemini CLI

10.77%
按下载量换算12

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/marketing-skills --skill copywriting 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills