营销写作
- 作者仓库星标 8
- 作者更新于 实时读取
- 作者仓库 dojo.md
- 领域
- 写作
- 兼容 Agent
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- 信任分
- 88 / 100 · 社区维护
- 作者 / 版本 / 许可
- @edholofy · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 需简单配置
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- 未声明(默认跨平台)
- 底层运行要求
- 无特殊要求
- 文件与系统权限
-
- 只读
- 允许写入 / 修改
- 网络行为
- 仅限本地
- 安装命令数
- 26 条
档案由构建时根据 SKILL.md 与安装命令自动衍生,可能与作者实际意图存在差异。
需要注意: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: ad-copy-google-ads
description: Writes Google Ads copy including RSA headlines, descriptions, extensions, DKI, CTAs, and intent-…
category: 写作
runtime: 无特殊运行时
---
# ad-copy-google-ads 输出预览
## PART A: 任务判断
- 适用问题:文章、文案、发言稿、润色或结构化表达。
- 输入要求:目标材料、限制条件、期望输出和验收方式。
- 证据边界:围绕“Domain Knowledge / Character Limits — The Hard Constraints That Keep Failing / DKI — The Syntax That Must Be Exact”读取原文规则,不把推断写成作者承诺。
## PART B: 执行结果
- **01** 任务判断:确认你的需求是否属于文章、文案、发言稿、润色或结构化表达,并标出输入、限制和预期结果。
- **02** 执行计划:优先按“Domain Knowledge / Character Limits — The Hard Constraints That Keep Failing / DKI — The Syntax That Must Be Exact”拆成步骤,说明每一步会读取什么、修改什么、产出什么。
- **03** 交付结果:给出可复制的命令、文件改动、检查清单或内容草稿,并说明如何继续迭代。
- **04** 风险边界:结合 读取文件、写入/修改文件、主要在本地完成、通常不需要额外 API Key 给出执行前确认项。
## Running Rules
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先小样例验证,再放大到真实任务。
- 交付时同时给结果、检查口径和下一步迭代建议。 原文没有稳定的斜杠命令要求。安装验证后通常全局生效,直接在对话里点名这个 Skill 并描述任务即可。
告诉 Agent 目标文件或材料、期望结果、不可改范围、是否允许联网或执行命令。本 Skill 的权限画像是:读取文件、写入/修改文件。
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“Domain Knowledge / Character Limits — The Hard Constraints That Keep Failing / DKI — The Syntax That Must Be Exact”工作;涉及文件或命令时,先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
检查最终产物是否包含明确结果、必要证据和下一步动作;如果输出泛泛而谈,就补充输入、边界和验收标准后重跑。
---
name: ad-copy-google-ads
description: Writes Google Ads copy including RSA headlines, descriptions, extensions, DKI, CTAs, and intent-…
category: 写作
source: edholofy/dojo.md
---
# ad-copy-google-ads
## 什么时候使用
- ad-copy-google-ads 是写作方向的技能,帮你打磨文章、稿子、内容表达 适合处理文章、文案、润色、翻译、总结和结构化表达,核心价值是把输入、判断、执行、验证和交付边界固定下来,避免 Agent 泛泛回答。 把任务拆成可执行…
- 面向文章、文案、发言稿、润色或结构化表达,优先处理能明确输入、步骤和验收标准的工作。
## 需要提供什么
- 目标材料、目录范围、期望结果和不可改动内容。
- 是否允许联网、执行命令、读写文件或调用外部服务。
## 执行规则
- 围绕「Domain Knowledge / Character Limits — The Hard Constraints That Keep Failing / DKI — The Syntax That Must Be Exact」组织步骤,不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先跑小样例,确认结果可检查后再扩大任务范围。
## 输出要求
- 给出最终产物、关键证据、验证方式和下一步动作。
- 信息不足时标记 unknown,不编造命令、平台或依赖。 作者原文负责流程事实;仓库文件负责来源和命令;流狐只补充适用场景、限制和质量判断。
skill "ad-copy-google-ads" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> Domain Knowledge / Character Limits — The Hard Constraints That Keep Failing / DKI — The Syntax That Must Be Exact
规则层 -> SKILL.md 触发条件 / 执行顺序 / 输出格式
运行层 -> 无特殊运行时 | 读取文件、写入/修改文件 | 主要在本地完成
安全层 -> 通常不需要额外 API Key + 小任务验证 + diff / 日志复核
输出层 -> 可复制结果 + 检查清单 + 下一步迭代
} Domain Knowledge
Character Limits — The Hard Constraints That Keep Failing
These are absolute. Count every character including spaces before outputting:
| Element | Limit | Sweet Spot |
|---|---|---|
| RSA Headline | 30 chars | 25–30 chars (use the space) |
| RSA Description | 90 chars | 75–90 chars (short = wasted opportunity) |
| Sitelink title | 25 chars | 20–25 chars |
| Sitelink description | 35 chars | 30–35 chars |
| Callout extension | 25 chars | 15–25 chars |
| Structured snippet value | 25 chars | 15–25 chars |
Critical: Count characters after DKI keyword substitution. If your longest keyword + surrounding text exceeds 30 chars in a headline, the default text fires — or worse, the ad breaks.
DKI — The Syntax That Must Be Exact
Format: {KeyWord:Default Text} — capitalization matters:
{keyword:default}→ all lowercase{Keyword:Default}→ First word capitalized{KeyWord:Default}→ Each Word Capitalized (most common for headlines){KEYWORD:DEFAULT}→ ALL CAPS (rarely appropriate)
DKI risks most people miss:
- Competitor names in keyword lists → your ad says "Buy [Competitor]" (policy violation)
- Misspelled keywords → misspelled ads
- Long-tail keywords exceeding character limits → default text fires unpredictably
- Grammatically awkward insertions: "Get {KeyWord:Services} Today" + keyword "plumber near me" → "Get Plumber Near Me Today"
- Always provide 2–3 static (non-DKI) headline variants as safety nets
Quality Score — The Three Levers
- Expected CTR: Driven by headline specificity, numbers, strong CTAs. Fix: replace generic headlines with benefit-specific ones containing numbers.
- Ad Relevance: Keyword must appear naturally in headline AND description. Fix: mirror the exact search intent language, not synonyms.
- Landing Page Experience: Ad promise must match page content. Fix: if ad says "Free Trial," landing page must show free trial above the fold. Recommend specific landing page changes, not vague "improve your page."
Non-obvious: A 90% relevant ad with a mismatched landing page scores worse than a 70% relevant ad with a perfectly matched page. Landing page is the most underweighted factor in most people's thinking.
Search Intent → Copy Strategy Mapping
| Intent Type | User Mindset | Headline Focus | Description Focus | CTA Style |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Informational | Learning | "How to..." / "Guide to..." | Educate, offer resource | "Download Guide" / "Learn More" |
| Commercial | Comparing | Differentiators, "vs," "Best" | Social proof, comparisons | "Compare Plans" / "See Why" |
| Transactional | Buying | Price, offer, product name | Urgency, guarantees, trust | "Buy Now" / "Start Free Trial" |
| Navigational | Finding specific brand | Brand name, exact match | Direct to right page | "Visit Official Site" |
Mixed intent is real: "best CRM software" is commercial + transactional. Lead with comparison angle, include transactional CTA. Don't go so generic you convert nobody.
Urgency Psychology — What's Legitimate vs. Policy Violation
Legitimate urgency triggers:
- Real deadlines: "Offer Ends March 31" (must be true)
- Genuine scarcity: "Only 3 Spots Left" (must reflect real inventory)
- Value-based urgency: "Save $200 When You Start This Week"
- Loss aversion framing: "Don't Miss Your Q4 Window"
Policy violations (Google will reject):
- Fake countdown timers with no real deadline
- Perpetual "Last Chance" or "Final Sale" that never ends
- "Act Now Before It's Too Late" with no specific consequence
- Exclamation marks in headlines (Google disapproves multiple !!!)
- ALL CAPS words for fake urgency
Why each works (the psychology):
- Loss aversion: Losing $100 feels ~2x worse than gaining $100 (Kahneman). Frame savings as "Don't lose X" not just "Save X."
- FOMO: Social proof + scarcity combined ("Join 10,000+ Marketers — 50 Seats Left") outperforms either alone.
- Commitment bias: Low-barrier CTAs ("Start Free" vs "Buy Now") exploit that once started, people continue.
Headline Formulas That Actually Differentiate
Five genuinely distinct approaches (not surface rewording):
- Problem-Solution: Name the pain → offer the fix. Best for: pain-aware audiences. "Stop Wasting Ad Spend | AI-Powered Optimization"
- Authority/Social Proof: Credibility-first. Best for: skeptical/comparison shoppers. "Trusted by 50,000 Brands | #1 Rated Platform"
- Specificity/Numbers: Concrete outcomes. Best for: analytical buyers. "Cut CPA 37% in 30 Days | See How"
- Emotional/Aspirational: Identity and transformation. Best for: B2C, lifestyle. "Build the Business You Deserve"
- Direct Offer: Lead with the deal. Best for: transactional, price-sensitive. "Plans from $29/mo | No Setup Fee"
For comparative analysis: Authority headlines typically show 15–25% higher CTR but lower conversion rates than direct offer headlines. Specificity headlines with real numbers outperform vague claims by 30–40% on CTR. These aren't arbitrary — they reflect that specificity filters intent (higher quality clicks) while broad emotional appeals cast wider nets.
Extension Copy — Distinct, Not Redundant
Sitelinks: Each must represent a genuinely different landing page destination. Bad: "Our Services" / "What We Offer" / "Our Solutions." Good: "Pricing Plans" / "Case Studies" / "Free Demo" / "Integration Docs."
Callouts: Must add value NOT already in headlines/descriptions. Think trust signals: "No Long-Term Contract" / "24/7 Live Support" / "SOC 2 Certified" / "Free Migration."
Structured snippets: Use Google-approved headers only: Amenities, Brands, Courses, Degree programs, Destinations, Featured hotels, Insurance coverage, Models, Neighborhoods, Service catalog, Shows, Styles, Types. Values must be specific items, not descriptions.
Common Mistakes — The Diagnostic Framework
| Mistake | Symptom | Fix Principle |
|---|---|---|
| Generic copy | Could apply to any competitor | Include specific numbers, brand differentiators, exact outcomes |
| Feature dumping | Lists features without benefits | Each feature needs a "so that..." benefit |
| Keyword stuffing | Awkward repetition, low readability | 1 exact keyword mention + natural variations |
| No CTA | Description ends without direction | Every description ends with specific action verb |
| Headline repetition | 15 headlines saying the same thing 15 ways | Use the 5 formula types above, each genuinely different |
| Mismatched intent | Selling to someone still researching | Match copy tone to where they are in the funnel |
Quick Start
Input: "Write RSA headlines for a project management SaaS targeting 'project management software for teams'"
Output (note: every headline is ≤30 chars, counted):
Pin 1 (keyword-rich):
H1: "Team Project Management Tool" [30] ✓
H2: "Project Software for Teams" [28] ✓
Pin 2 (benefit/differentiator):
H3: "Cut Project Delays by 40%" [26] ✓
H4: "See All Projects in One View" [29] ✓
Unpinned (variety):
H5: "Trusted by 12,000+ Teams" [24] ✓
H6: "Start Free — No Card Needed" [28] ✓
H7: "Assign, Track & Deliver Fast" [29] ✓
H8: "Replace Spreadsheet Chaos" [26] ✓
H9: "Plans Starting at $9/User" [26] ✓
H10: "4.8★ on G2 — See Reviews" [24] ✓
H11: "#1 Rated by PCMag 2024" [22] ✓
H12: "Onboard Your Team in 1 Day" [27] ✓
H13: "Built-In Gantt & Kanban" [23] ✓
H14: "Get Your Free 14-Day Trial" [27] ✓
H15: "Integrates w/ Slack & Jira" [27] ✓
Pinning rationale: H1/H2 pinned to Position 1 ensures keyword relevance for Quality Score. H3/H4 pinned to Position 2 ensures every combination leads with relevance and follows with a compelling reason. Remaining unpinned to maximize Google's optimization across combinations.
Character count verification: Every headline individually counted. Longest is 30 characters. ✓
Core Rules
ALWAYS count characters of every headline, description, and extension element before outputting. Display the count in brackets. This is the #1 failure mode — a single over-limit element invalidates the work.
When writing comparative analysis of ad formulas:
- Ground CTR predictions in specific principles: "Specificity headlines with numbers typically achieve 15–25% higher CTR than generic equivalents because they pre-qualify clicks"
- Never assign arbitrary percentages without stating the reasoning mechanism
- Reference loss aversion, social proof, commitment bias, or specificity bias by name with brief explanation of mechanism
When using DKI:
- List every keyword that will be inserted
- Calculate max character count: longest keyword + surrounding static text
- Flag any keyword that creates grammatical awkwardness, policy risk, or exceeds limits
- Always include 2–3 non-DKI static headline alternatives
When writing urgency/CTA copy:
- Every urgency claim must be verifiable or framed as conditional ("If you sign up this week" vs "Last chance ever")
- Name the specific psychology principle powering each technique
- Include at least one rejected example with explicit policy violation explanation
When writing descriptions, ensure each stands alone. Test: pair description D3 with headline H7 — does it make sense? Is there redundancy? Contradiction? Every combination must be coherent.
Prefer using 85–90 chars in descriptions over stopping at 50–60 chars. Short descriptions waste paid real estate. Fill the space with specific benefits, social proof, or objection-handling — not filler.
Decision Tree
- If task involves keyword insertion → check DKI syntax, verify every keyword fits within character limits after substitution, provide static fallbacks
- If task involves writing headlines → count every character, verify ≤30, ensure 5+ genuinely different angles (not surface rewording), specify pinning rationale
- If task involves extensions → verify sitelinks point to distinct pages, callouts don't repeat headline content, snippet headers are Google-approved
- If task involves intent matching → classify intent first, then write copy matching that stage, call out if intent is mixed and handle both
- If task involves fixing existing ads → diagnose the specific mistake by name, explain performance impact (CTR/QS/conversion), show before/after with the principle
- If task involves Quality Score → identify which of the 3 components is weakest, target fixes to that specific component, include landing page recommendations
- If task involves urgency → verify every claim is policy-compliant, name the psychology principle, include a rejected/non-compliant example for contrast
- If task asks for a "complete" ad build → deliver: keyword grouping → ad groups → full RSAs (15 headlines + 4 descriptions) → extensions (sitelinks, callouts, snippets) → DKI variants → pinning strategy → landing page recommendations → QS predictions with reasoning
Edge Cases
DKI with dangerous keywords
Trap: Client's keyword list includes competitor brand names, misspellings, or long-tail phrases. Agent uses DKI without auditing. Correct handling: Scan every keyword. Flag: competitor names (trademark policy), keywords >20 chars (leaving <10 for static text), misspellings, phrases that don't grammatically fit the template. Exclude those from DKI ad groups, serve them static ads instead.
Mixed search intent
Trap: "best accounting software free trial" — is this commercial (comparing "best") or transactional (wants "free trial")? Correct handling: Acknowledge mixed intent explicitly. Lead with commercial angle in H1 (comparison/authority), include transactional CTA in H2/description. Don't collapse to one intent.
Ad formula comparative analysis without data
Trap: Asked to predict CTR/conversion for different formulas, agent invents specific percentages (e.g., "this will get 4.2% CTR"). Correct handling: Provide relative comparisons grounded in principles: "Authority headlines typically outperform generic headlines by 15–25% on CTR based on social proof effects, but underperform direct-offer headlines on conversion rate because they attract broader audiences." Never claim exact CTR without test data.
Structured snippets with wrong headers
Trap: Using "Features" or "Benefits" as snippet headers — these aren't Google-approved. Correct handling: Only use: Amenities, Brands, Courses, Degree programs, Destinations, Featured hotels, Insurance coverage, Models, Neighborhoods, Service catalog, Shows, Styles, Types. If the business doesn't fit these, use "Types" or "Service catalog" as the most flexible options.
Callouts that duplicate headline content
Trap: Headline says "Free Shipping" and callout also says "Free Shipping." Correct handling: Callouts must add NEW information. If free shipping is in the headline, callout should cover something else: "No Restocking Fees" / "Easy 30-Day Returns."
Description character limit — the utilization trap
Trap: Writing descriptions of 40–50 characters that technically comply but waste 50% of available space. Correct handling: Target 75–90 characters. Fill with specific proof points, objection handlers, or secondary CTAs. "Get enterprise project management with real-time dashboards and Gantt charts. Start your free 14-day trial today." (90 chars) beats "Manage projects better. Try it free." (35 chars).
Anti-Patterns
- DON'T output ad copy without character counts in brackets. Instead, count and display
[27]after every headline and description. - DON'T write 15 headlines that are variations of the same message ("Great Software" / "Amazing Software" / "Excellent Software"). Instead, use 5+ distinct formula types: problem-solution, authority, specificity, emotional, direct offer.
- DON'T use vague CTAs like "Click Here" or "Learn More" as defaults. Instead, use conversion-specific verbs: "Start Free Trial" / "Get Your Quote" / "Book a Demo."
- DON'T claim urgency without a verifiable basis. Instead, frame conditionally: "Save 20% — Offer Ends [Date]" with a real date, or use value-based urgency: "Start saving this quarter."
- DON'T assign arbitrary CTR predictions like "this will get 3.7% CTR." Instead, provide relative performance predictions grounded in named principles: "Expect 20–30% CTR lift over generic copy based on specificity bias."
- DON'T recommend DKI without auditing the keyword list for overflow, policy risks, and grammar issues. Instead, list every keyword, calculate max character usage, and flag problems before writing the template.
- DON'T write sitelinks that point to conceptually identical pages. Instead, ensure each sitelink serves a distinct user need: pricing, proof, product details, getting started.
- DON'T diagnose ad problems as "could be better." Instead, name the specific mistake (keyword stuffing, feature dumping, intent mismatch), explain the performance consequence, and show the fix.
- DON'T skip landing page alignment when discussing Quality Score. Instead, specify what must appear on the landing page to match the ad's promise — "If the ad says 'Free 14-Day Trial,' the landing page needs a trial signup form above the fold
先判断是否适合
作者设计意图
作者的方法与取舍
边界和复核