Marketing claims review
Skill yarlson/yarstack/plugins/yarstack/skills/marketing-claims-review
Engineering workflows and standards for Codex and Claude Code: plan, implement, test, review, and deliver repository changes.
npx -y skills add yarlson/yarstack --skill marketing-claims-reviewAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 3 stars3 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Audit or, when authorized, rewrite persuasive product claims against shipped-product evidence. Use for landing pages, marketing-heavy READMEs, feature or pricing pages, comparisons, and calls to action.
SKILL.md
1.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Marketing Claims Review
Own claim substantiation, positioning, comparisons, and first-visitor clarity regardless of file location.
Workflow
- Confirm pages, audience, and audit-only or authorized rewrite mode.
- Build a capability map with implementation and runtime evidence taking precedence over marketing prose, demos, and roadmap material.
- Classify material claims as
accurate,unclear,unsupported,exaggerated,stale, orfalse. - Test whether a first-time visitor can identify the product, intended user, problem, mechanism, difference, limitations, and next action.
- For each problematic claim, cite evidence and recommend
keep,rewrite,move,remove,qualify, orprove. - Rewrite only when authorized, preserving distinctions between shipped, partial, experimental, planned, and unsupported behavior.
- After an authorized rewrite, use
english-text-reviewand apply material findings without weakening substantiation, necessary qualifications, or intentional voice.
Use docs-review for repository-document structure and discoverability, and docs-drift-review only for drift caused by the current change. Comparative claims requiring external competitor evidence remain unverified unless authoritative evidence is available and its use is authorized.
Do not infer capabilities from aspirations, invent proof, or force parallel agents.
Finish with scoped claims, evidence, dispositions, authorized edits, and unresolved proof needs.