Campaign strategy

Campaign Strategy Skill

Transform client research into an actionable email strategy for a single segment. Output email sequence blueprints and AI personalization variables for the Email Copywriting skill to execute.

Output Contract

strategy.md is not machine-parsed - it's read by downstream skills (email-copywriting, prompt-writer) for context. Hard rules this skill must honor anyway, since its output flows into files that other tools read:

• AI variable names must be Title Case with spaces: Subject Line, First Line, PS Line. They become [Title Case] brackets in emails.md and H3 headings in prompts.md - the three have to agree exactly.
• AI variable names ≤30 chars (enforced in prompts.md by the prompt-writer contract).
• Never reference data sources personalization tools typically lack (news, funding, events, social media, blogs) - these propagate into prompts.md and break at runtime when the data is not available.

Required Context

Before creating a strategy, always load the client context:

1. Read {workspace}/research.md - Client research: overview, ICP, value prop, case studies, lead magnets
2. Read {workspace}/notes.md (if it exists) - Client-specific preferences
3. Read plan.md from parent directory - Get segment definition, angle, ICP, and testing hypothesis

Directory Structure Reference ({workspace} = the client campaign workspace, default ./cold-email/{slug}/):

{workspace}/
├── research.md       # Client research - ICP, value prop, case studies
├── notes.md          # Optional client preferences and feedback
└── {plan_folder}/    # One per campaign, e.g. "03-15 - plan 1"
    ├── plan.md           # Plan with ICP, segments, angles, testing hypothesis
    ├── 1 - {segment}/
    │   └── strategy.md   # THIS file - segment strategy
    ├── 2 - {segment}/
    │   └── strategy.md
    └── ...

Required Inputs

After loading context, gather:

1. Segment folder path - e.g., {workspace}/03-15 - plan 1/1 - early-stage/
2. Plan.md - Read from parent directory of segment folder to get:
   • Broad ICP definition
   • Segment-specific criteria
   • Messaging angle for this segment
   • Testing hypothesis (if any)
3. Client Research Document - Check {workspace}/research.md or uploads
4. Campaign Goal - What action to drive:
   • Book demos/meetings
   • Drive traffic to landing page
   • Get replies for qualification
   • Promote lead magnet

Output Format

Generate a single Markdown document saved to {segment_folder}/strategy.md:

# {Client} - {Segment Name} Strategy

## Segment Overview
- **ICP**: {Broad ICP from plan.md}
- **Segment**: {Specific segment criteria from plan.md}
- **Angle**: {Messaging angle from plan.md}
- **Goal**: reply-based / click-based
- **Funnel Type**: {type}

## Email Sequence

[Markdown format - see references/email-sequence-guide.md]

## AI Personalization Variables

[JSON array - see references/ai-variables-guide.md]

## AI Rewriting (Optional)

Enable: [yes/no]
Tone: [description]

## Sequence Tests (Optional)

[Only when supporting macro test from plan.md Testing Hypothesis]

AI Rewriting Guidelines

Include the AI Rewriting section when:

• Campaign uses AI personalization (first lines, PS lines, body variables)
• Higher quality/variation is desired for personalization outputs
• Budget allows ($5 per 1,000 contacts for rewriting flow)

Skip AI Rewriting when:

• No AI personalization variables exist
• Subject lines only (rewriting too risky for subjects)
• Budget constraints require minimizing AI costs

When enabled, prompt-writer will add a rewriting prompt at the end of prompts.md.

Core Principles

1. Building block approach - Treat copy and campaigns as modular building blocks (like Legos) that can be tested in many combinations. Volume of combinations is how we discover what works. See references/building-blocks.md for the full philosophy.

2. Start strong, diversify, close strong - Lead email uses strongest angle. Middle emails try new angles. Final email is a breakup with second-strongest angle.

3. Relevance over personalization - Don't just use {firstName}. Show deep understanding of their world using AI variables sourced from LinkedIn/website.

4. One idea per email - Each email has one goal, one CTA, one main point.

5. Value-first - Every touch provides insight, education, or genuine help.

6. Data constraints - AI variables can ONLY use: company website main page, LinkedIn company page, LinkedIn individual profile. No news, events, funding announcements, or timely triggers.

Sequence Structure

• 3-5 emails maximum
• Delays: 0 days for first, 2-4 days between follow-ups
• CTAs: Reply-based for meetings, click-based for lead magnets. Every email's CTA asks for the actual offer, including Email 1 (which leads with the strongest version of that ask). No soft diagnostic questions as CTAs. Never send naked booking links - ask a direct question first.
• Length: keep static bodies punchy - at or under ~80 words (follow-ups well under). email-review enforces a hard ceiling.
• Format: AI variables use {{Title Case}}; every email signs with {sender_signature}.

Workflow

1. Receive segment folder path
2. Read plan.md from parent directory to get ICP, segment definition, and angle
3. Load client research from {workspace}/research.md
4. Read references:
   • references/building-blocks.md - Campaign testing philosophy
   • references/email-sequence-guide.md - Sequence planning details
   • references/ai-variables-guide.md - Personalization patterns
   • references/sequence-tests-guide.md - Email sequence A/B testing
5. Check for test opportunities (optional):
   • Read plan.md Testing Hypothesis section
   • Evaluate if sequence tests would SUPPORT (not conflict with) macro test
   • Only propose tests that refine HOW, not change WHAT (ICP/angle/offer)
   • Skip tests if first campaign for client, low TAM, or no clear hypothesis
6. Generate strategy document with email sequence (Markdown) and AI variables (JSON)
7. Save to {segment_folder}/strategy.md

Alignment Checklist

Before finalizing, verify:

• Value props from client research are woven through sequence
• Segment-specific pain points inform email hooks
• Angle from plan.md is reflected in the messaging
• Funnel type matches campaign goal
• Lead magnets integrated at appropriate point
• AI variables feasible with available data sources
• Each email has distinct purpose in sequence progression

Edit Mode (Improvement Context)

When invoked with improvement context (mode: "edit"), this skill edits/rewrites portions of strategy.md while preserving what works.

Detecting Edit Mode

Check for improvement context in the conversation:

• mode: "edit" indicates edit mode
• trigger: "analytics" or trigger: "feedback" indicates source
• improvement_instruction contains specific changes to make

Edit Mode Workflow

1. Read improvement context: Extract improvement_instruction object
2. Load existing strategy.md: Parse current strategy from segment folder
3. Identify preservation zones: What should NOT change (see below)
4. Identify change zones: What specifically to modify
5. Apply scoped changes: Only modify specified sections
6. Generate diff: Show before/after for changed sections
7. Get approval: Wait for user to confirm changes
8. Save: Update strategy.md with approved changes
9. Cascade check: Notify if changes affect downstream files (emails.md, prompts.md)
10. Log: Update improvement-log.md in plan folder

Handling Edit Scopes

Scope	Action	What Changes	Cascades To
"email sequence"	Rewrite email descriptions	Email blueprint section	emails.md, prompts.md
"AI variables"	Update AI variable definitions	AI variables JSON	prompts.md
"segment overview"	Update ICP, goal, funnel type	Overview section	May affect all
"pivot angle"	Change messaging angle	Multiple sections	emails.md, prompts.md
"full rewrite"	Generate new strategy	Everything	All downstream

Preservation Rules

When editing strategy.md:

Always preserve (unless explicitly changing):

• ICP and segment definition (unless pivoting)
• Available data sources and constraints
• Funnel type (reply-based vs click-based)
• Core value proposition from client research

Consider preserving:

• Email sequence structure if only changing copy angle
• AI variable names if prompts are working

Safe to change:

• Email descriptions and goals
• AI variable definitions
• Messaging angle and hooks
• Offer/CTA specifics

Edit Mode Output Format

## Proposed Changes to strategy.md

### Email Sequence Section

**Before:**
Email 3:
- primary_goal: Re-engage with social proof
- description: Share a case study relevant to their industry
- delay_in_days: 3

**After:**
Email 3:
- primary_goal: Re-engage with curiosity hook
- description: Ask a thought-provoking question about their growth strategy, no case study yet
- delay_in_days: 3

**Rationale:** Email 3 has 15% lower opens - case study subject lines may feel too salesy

### Cascade Impact
- emails.md: Email 3 will need rewriting (invoke email-copywriting after approval)
- prompts.md: No changes needed (same AI variables)

---

Approve these changes? [Yes/No/Modify]

Analytics-Informed Editing

When analytics_context is provided:

• Use sequence_stats to identify which emails need strategic changes
• Reference weak_spots for specific improvement areas
• Consider sibling_comparison to learn from winning campaigns

Common patterns:

• Low Email 1 opens = Strengthen opening hook strategy
• Drop-off after Email 2 = Email 3 strategy needs pivot
• Low replies across all = CTA or offer strategy issue

Feedback-Informed Editing

When feedback_context is provided:

• "Wrong angle" = Pivot messaging strategy
• "Offer not resonating" = Update lead magnet/CTA strategy
• "ICP mismatch" = Update segment overview section
• "Emails too long" = Adjust email descriptions

Cascade Notifications

After editing strategy.md, check if changes affect downstream files:

Change Type	Affects	Action Needed
Email descriptions	emails.md	Re-run email-copywriting
AI variables	prompts.md	Re-run prompt-writer
ICP or offer	All files	Consider full regeneration

Notify user: "Strategy updated. These downstream files may need regeneration: [list]"

Edit Mode Checklist

Before saving edits, verify:

• Only specified sections were modified
• Preservation zones respected
• Changes align with client research
• Cascade impacts identified
• Diff shown and approved by user

Sequence Test Guidelines

Define micro-level email sequence tests that complement (not duplicate) macro-level tests from campaign-planning.

Two A/B levels - don't confuse them. This skill defines email-step A/B (### Variant A/B inside one step - subject, hook, CTA). Testing whole sequences against each other is a different thing: a segment-level sequence A/B test, set up in campaign-planning as percentage mode (random %-distribution arms, each arm a totally different sequence). If the plan is in percentage mode, each arm is its own segment folder and you write its full sequence normally - the "test" is the arm itself, so you usually skip within-step variants in that arm.

What campaign-planning handles (DON'T duplicate):

• ICP testing (different personas/industries)
• Messaging Angle testing (different hooks/pain points)
• Lead Magnet testing (different offers)
• Whole-sequence testing (percentage mode - each arm a different full sequence)

What sequence tests handle:

• Email execution tests within a SINGLE segment/arm
• Tests defined here, implemented in emails.md by email-copywriting skill
• Variants appear in same emails.md file (Variant A / Variant B)

Testable Variables

Only email sequence tests (no prompt tests):

Category	Variables
Subject Line	Personalized vs static, short vs medium, question vs statement
Opening Hook	With/without AI first line, question vs observation
Body Structure	Short (3-4 lines) vs medium (5-7 lines), paragraph vs bullets
Social Proof	Include vs exclude case study reference, metric vs name drop
CTA Phrasing	Low commitment ("Curious if...") vs direct ("Worth 15 min?")
Tone	Casual vs professional, humble vs assertive
PS Line	With vs without, personal vs professional content
Timing	Short delays (2-2-3 days) vs long (3-4-5 days)
Email Length	Concise vs detailed
Proof Placement	Early (email 1-2) vs late (email 3)

When to Propose Tests

• Plan has clear macro hypothesis to support (sequence test refines delivery)
• Campaign targets 5,000+ prospects (enough volume to split 50/50)
• Two reasonable approaches exist for an element
• Client expressed preference worth validating
• Historical data suggests optimization opportunity

When to Skip Tests

• Macro test is already complex (don't add noise)
• Limited TAM (<2,000 contacts - not enough volume)
• First campaign for client (establish baseline first)
• No clear hypothesis (testing for testing's sake)
• Tests would conflict with plan's macro test variable

Test Design Rules

1. Maximum 1 test per strategy (keep it simple)
2. Must reference plan.md's test variable (show how it supports the macro test)
3. Hold constant: ICP, messaging angle, offer, AI variables
4. Vary only: Delivery elements (subject format, PS line, body length, CTA phrasing, timing)
5. Clear hypothesis: State expected outcome and why
6. Measurable: Define primary metric (open rate / reply rate / click rate)

Sequence Tests Output Format

When including a sequence test, add this section to strategy.md:

## Sequence Tests

### Test Context
**Plan Test Variable**: [From plan.md - what macro test is running]
**Supporting Hypothesis**: [How this micro-test supports the macro test]

### Active Test

**Test Name**: [e.g., PS Line Inclusion Test]
**Variable**: [What's being tested]
- **Variant A (Control)**: [Default approach - describe]
- **Variant B (Test)**: [Alternative approach - describe]
- **Hypothesis**: [Why we think B might outperform A]
- **Primary Metric**: [Open rate / Reply rate / Click rate]
- **Affected Emails**: [Which emails have variants - e.g., "Email 1 only", "All emails", "Emails 2-3"]

**Implementation for email-copywriting:**
[Clear instructions on how to create variants in emails.md]

Example: PS Line Inclusion Test

## Sequence Tests

### Test Context
**Plan Test Variable**: Messaging Angle (guarantee vs ROI)
**Supporting Hypothesis**: The guarantee angle may perform differently with/without personal PS lines - testing whether personalization adds or detracts from the focused offer message.

### Active Test

**Test Name**: PS Line Inclusion Test
**Variable**: PS Line
- **Variant A (Control)**: Include AI-personalized PS line after signature
- **Variant B (Test)**: No PS line - end email at CTA
- **Hypothesis**: The guarantee message is already strong; PS line may dilute focus or add unnecessary length
- **Primary Metric**: Reply rate
- **Affected Emails**: Email 1 and Email 4 (the emails that currently use {{PS Line}})

**Implementation for email-copywriting:**
- Email 1: Write two versions - one with {{PS Line}} placeholder, one without
- Email 4: Write two versions - one with {{PS Line Final}} placeholder, one without
- Emails 2-3: No variants needed (they don't have PS lines)

Alignment with Campaign Planning

Before defining a sequence test, verify it SUPPORTS (not conflicts with) the macro test:

Plan Tests	Compatible Sequence Tests	Why Compatible
Messaging Angle	Subject format, PS line, body length	Same audience, same offer, different delivery
ICP	None recommended	Keep execution identical to isolate ICP
Lead Magnet	CTA phrasing, proof placement	Same audience, refines offer delivery

Rule: If plan.md is testing ICP, skip sequence tests entirely to get clean ICP comparison.