Copy Rewrite

copy-rewrite

Purpose

Take existing underperforming copy and rewrite it with proper RMBC structure. This is a two-phase skill: first audit (diagnose what's broken), then rewrite (fix it section by section). Every rewrite shows before/after for each section with an explanation of what changed and why. The goal is not to rewrite from scratch — it's to preserve what works, fix what doesn't, and add what's missing. The audit phase prevents the common AI mistake of rewriting copy that was already strong.

Inputs

| Input | Required | Description | |-------|----------|-------------| | original_copy | Yes | The full copy to be rewritten — paste it in or provide the file path | | copy_type | Yes | One of: landing_page, email, ad, vsl_script, advertorial, product_page, other | | target_audience | Yes | Who the prospect is — demographics, pain points, desires, sophistication level | | key_mechanism | No | The product's unique mechanism (output from /mechanism-ideation) | | performance_data | No | Any metrics: conversion rate, CTR, bounce rate, avg time on page, or qualitative feedback | | tone | No | One of: aggressive, conversational, professional (default: preserve original tone) |

Execution Protocol

Step 1 — Load Framework Context

Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions. Copy rewrites require understanding all four RMBC phases to diagnose which phase is failing in the original.

Step 2 — Audit the Original Copy

Score the original across 6 dimensions (1-5 each):

| Dimension | What to Evaluate | |-----------|-----------------| | Hook strength | Does the opening stop the scroll? Is it specific or generic? | | Problem agitation | Does it make the pain vivid and urgent? Or does it rush to the solution? | | Mechanism clarity | Is there a named mechanism? Is it explained simply? Or is it features-only? | | Proof quality | Are there specific claims, testimonials, data? Or vague assertions? | | Offer structure | Is the value clear? Is there price anchoring? Risk reversal? | | CTA clarity | Is there one clear action? Is urgency real or manufactured? |

Produce a scorecard and identify the 2-3 weakest dimensions.

Step 3 — Map the Rewrite Plan

Based on audit scores, determine:

• Keep — Sections scoring 4-5 (preserve with minor polish)
• Rewrite — Sections scoring 2-3 (significant structural changes)
• Add — Missing RMBC elements that don't exist in the original
• Cut — Content that's diluting the argument (tangents, redundancy, weak proof)

Step 4 — Execute Section-by-Section Rewrite

For each section that needs work:

1. Quote the original — Exact text from the input
2. Diagnose — One line: what's wrong and why it underperforms
3. Rewrite — The improved version
4. Explain — What changed and what RMBC principle it applies

Preserve the original's voice and tone unless the user specified a different tone.

Step 5 — Assemble the Full Rewrite

Combine all sections (kept, rewritten, and added) into a cohesive final version. Ensure transitions between sections are smooth — a rewrite of individual sections can create jarring seams.

Output Format

## Copy Rewrite: [Copy Type] for [Product/Brand]

---

### Audit Scorecard

| Dimension | Score (1-5) | Verdict |
|-----------|-------------|---------|
| Hook strength | X | [1 line] |
| Problem agitation | X | [1 line] |
| Mechanism clarity | X | [1 line] |
| Proof quality | X | [1 line] |
| Offer structure | X | [1 line] |
| CTA clarity | X | [1 line] |

**Overall:** X/30
**Weakest areas:** [2-3 dimensions to focus on]

---

### Section-by-Section Rewrite

#### [Section Name]

**BEFORE:**
> [original text]

**DIAGNOSIS:** [what's wrong — 1 line]

**AFTER:**
[rewritten text]

**WHY:** [what RMBC principle this applies — 1 line]

[...repeat for each section...]

---

### Full Rewrite (Assembled)

[Complete rewritten copy, all sections combined with smooth transitions]

---

### Rewrite Summary

- **Sections kept:** [list]
- **Sections rewritten:** [list]
- **Sections added:** [list]
- **Sections cut:** [list]
- **Estimated impact:** [what should improve and why]

Quality Criteria

• Audit must score honestly — do not inflate weaknesses to justify more rewrites
• Before/after must be shown for every rewritten section — no invisible changes
• Rewrites must preserve the original voice unless a different tone was requested
• Added sections must fill genuine RMBC gaps, not pad word count
• The assembled full rewrite must read as cohesive copy, not a patchwork
• "Why" explanations must reference specific RMBC principles, not generic "this is better"
• Sections scoring 4-5 in audit should be kept with minimal changes — resist rewriting what works

• Specificity gate: Every claim in the copy must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "get results" or "improve your business"
• Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)
• Audience journey: The copy must reference where the reader IS (what they've tried, what's failing) — not just who they are demographically
• Proof diversity: Use at least 2 different proof types (testimonial, statistical, authority, case study) — do not rely on a single proof mode
• Objection handling: The copy must address at least 2 likely objections with concrete responses (ROI math, proof of similar result, risk reversal)

Related Skills

• Run /rmbc-copy-audit for a deeper standalone audit (without rewrite)
• Run /mechanism-ideation if the audit reveals no mechanism in the original
• Run /hook-battery if the hook scores 1-2
• Use format-specific skills for full rewrites from scratch: /lander-copy, /email-promo, /vsl-script

Attribution

> Generated using RMBC framework by Stefan Georgi. > Learn more: copyaccelerator.com/join

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: coleschaffer
• Source: coleschaffer/copywritingskills-rmbc
• License: MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.