gilde

← All craftbooks

Landing Page Copy

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

Write conversion-focused copy for a single landing page: it first locks the offer, the one primary audience, the single desired action, and the core promise, then drafts a full message hierarchy — hero headline and subhead, value props, social proof, objection handling, and one repeated CTA — then edits ruthlessly for clarity, specificity, and persuasive flow. Covers landing page copy, sales copy, conversion copywriting, hero copy, CTA copy, and value proposition writing. Offer-first ordering matters: a small model that nails the single offer and one CTA before writing avoids the diluted page that lists ten features, hedges the promise, and offers three competing actions.

Steps

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

  1. Offer scopeplannerentry

    lock the offer, one audience, one CTA, and the core promise

    Show working prompt
    1) State the OFFER in one sentence: the product/service and what the visitor gets. 2) Define exactly ONE primary audience and the specific pain or desire that brought them. 3) Pick the ONE primary call-to-action (e.g. 'Start free trial', 'Book a demo') — secondary CTAs are out of scope. 4) Write the core promise/value proposition in one line ('the one thing'). 5) List 3-5 concrete benefits (outcomes, not features) and the proof for each (stat, testimonial, guarantee). 6) List the top 2-3 objections a visitor will have and the rebuttal for each. Write an acceptance-criteria checklist (e.g. 'one headline states a specific outcome, not a vague slogan'; 'benefits are outcomes with proof, not feature lists'; 'exactly one CTA, repeated'; 'every objection is addressed'; 'reading level grade <=8'). Use write_task_note for the offer brief + checklist, and write the same to the produces path. No page copy yet.
  2. Draft the copycopywriter

    write the full message hierarchy section by section

    Show working prompt
    Write the landing page copy as a structured document with clear section labels. 1) HERO: a specific, benefit-driven headline (no vague slogans), a supporting subhead, and the primary CTA button label. 2) VALUE PROPS: 3-5 benefit blocks, each a short header + 1-2 sentences, leading with the outcome. 3) SOCIAL PROOF: testimonial(s) or trust signals with the proof from the brief. 4) OBJECTION HANDLING: a short FAQ or reassurance block answering each objection. 5) FINAL CTA: restate the promise and repeat the single CTA. Write tight, concrete, second-person copy; cut adjectives that do not earn their place. Output markdown with the section labels as H2s. Save to the produces path and note which checklist items pass.
  3. Editorial passreviewer

    sharpen specificity, persuasion, and a single clear CTA

    Show working prompt
    Edit the copy in place against the checklist. 1) Test the headline: is it a specific outcome a competitor could not also claim? If it is generic, rewrite it. 2) Convert any feature-speak into outcomes; make every benefit concrete and, where possible, quantified. 3) Confirm there is exactly ONE call-to-action and it is repeated verbatim in hero and final sections. 4) Verify each objection from the brief is answered. 5) Cut hype words, hedges, and filler; tighten to a grade-8 reading level. Rewrite weak lines directly. Save the polished copy 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 landing-copy.md and grade against the checklist. Check EACH and write PASS/FAIL: (a) one specific, outcome-driven headline (not a vague slogan); (b) benefits are outcomes with proof, not raw feature lists; (c) exactly one CTA, repeated identically in hero and final; (d) every brief objection is addressed; (e) social proof present; (f) tight, concrete, grade-8 copy with no hype filler. Copy that reads nicely but offers competing CTAs or buries the promise FAILS.

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: "draft" })` 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