gilde

← All craftbooks

Customer Case Study

Content and writingevalv1.0.0released 2026-06-05workflow: build-loop

Write a persuasive, evidence-backed customer success story in the classic challenge-solution-results arc: it first scopes the customer, the quantified before/after metrics, the approved customer quotes, and the single takeaway for prospects, then writes the case study with a results-forward summary, a relatable challenge, the solution narrative, and a measurable results section, then a review pass verifies every number and quote and the persuasive flow. Covers case study, customer success story, customer testimonial, success story, proof point, and B2B marketing content. Scoping the metrics and quotes before writing is the point: a small model that locks the quantified results first writes a credible story buyers trust, instead of a vague testimonial with adjectives but no proof.

Steps

Entry step: scope. Each step names the specialist role it wants; the full working prompt is expandable.

  1. Story scopeplannerentry

    lock the customer, before/after metrics, quotes, and takeaway

    Show working prompt
    1) Identify the customer: who they are, their industry/size, and what makes them relatable to the target prospect. 2) Define the CHALLENGE they faced before, in their terms. 3) Capture the quantified BEFORE and AFTER metrics (e.g. '40% slower onboarding → cut to 2 days', 'support tickets down 60%') — these are the spine of the story and must be specific, not vague. 4) Collect 1-2 approved, attributable customer quotes (name + title). 5) State the single TAKEAWAY a prospect should draw. Write an acceptance-criteria checklist (e.g. 'challenge-solution-results structure'; 'at least 2 quantified result metrics'; 'every metric and quote is sourced/approved, none invented'; 'at least one attributed customer quote'; 'results-forward summary at top'; 'one clear takeaway/CTA'). Use write_task_note for the story brief + metrics + checklist, and write the same to the produces path. No case-study prose yet.
  2. Write the case studycopywriter

    write the challenge-solution-results narrative

    Show working prompt
    Write the case study from the brief. 1) Headline + a results-forward summary box at the top (customer, the headline metric, the takeaway) so a skimmer gets the win immediately. 2) CHALLENGE section: tell the relatable before-state and what was at stake. 3) SOLUTION section: how the product/service was adopted and what changed in their workflow. 4) RESULTS section: present the quantified before/after metrics prominently (a short stat list or callouts), and weave in the customer quotes. 5) Close with the takeaway and a CTA for prospects. Use a credible, specific, third-person voice; let the numbers and quotes do the persuading. Output GitHub-flavored markdown. Save to the produces path and note which checklist items pass.
  3. Proof & flow reviewreviewer

    verify every metric and quote and the persuasive arc

    Show working prompt
    Review and edit the case study in place against the checklist. 1) Verify EVERY metric and quote against the scope's sourced data — nothing may be invented, rounded misleadingly, or unattributed (this is the credibility check). 2) Confirm the challenge-solution-results structure reads as a clear arc and the results-forward summary is at the top. 3) Cut vague claims and adjectives that are not backed by a number or quote. 4) Confirm at least one attributed customer quote and at least two quantified results. 5) Confirm the takeaway and CTA are clear. Fix weak passages directly. Save the polished case study to the produces path and note any criteria still unmet.
  4. Evaluatereviewer

    Grade the deliverable against every acceptance criterion. All pass → finish; any fail → loop back and fix the gap.

    Show working prompt
    Read case-study.md against the scope. Check EACH criterion and write PASS/FAIL: (a) clear challenge-solution-results structure with a results-forward summary at top; (b) at least two specific, quantified result metrics; (c) every metric and quote matches the sourced data — none invented or unattributed; (d) at least one attributed customer quote; (e) one clear takeaway and CTA; (f) credible, specific voice with no unbacked adjectives. A story with vague claims and no real numbers FAILS — loop back to write.

Then route — this is the whole point of the loop:

- **Every criterion PASSES →** call `advance_task_step({ ref, stepId: "evaluate", next: "finish" })`.
- **Any criterion FAILS →** write the specific gaps to notes, then call `advance_task_step({ ref, stepId: "evaluate", next: "write" })` to loop back. The builder fixes exactly those gaps.

Never route to `finish` while any criterion is unmet. The build phase's completion gate already blocked a grossly-incomplete deliverable; your job is the judgment an automated check cannot make (does it actually work, read well, look right). After ~3 unproductive loops, stop and report DONE_WITH_CONCERNS so the user can step in.
  5. Finishdeveloper

    All acceptance criteria met. Stamp a short summary and report DONE.

    Show working prompt
    Every acceptance criterion passed. Write a one-paragraph DONE summary to task notes via `write_task_note`: what was built, the deliverable path(s), and a one-line confirmation that each criterion is met. Then report DONE.

Triggers

Phrases that suggest this craftbook to a crew.

Source

View this craftbook on GitHub · MIT license