@ojesusmp/marketing-council 1.1.0

package/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+MIT License
+
+Copyright (c) 2026 ojesusmp
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
+of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
+in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
+to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
+furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
+copies or substantial portions of the Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
+IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
+FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
+AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
+LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
+OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
+SOFTWARE.

package/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+# marketing-council
+
+> 12-seat marketing/sales/copy council with Alex Hormozi as 13th-seat coordinator and a Skeptic post-verdict challenger. Produces an integrated playbook for digital products, AI agents, web pages, courses, and indie services.
+
+A Claude Code skill modeled on `council-of-12` and `forge-council`, specialized for selling. Twelve marketing disciplines analyze the product, Hormozi integrates via the value equation, and a Skeptic seat challenges the signed playbook to kill confirmation bias.
+
+## Install
+
+### Option 1: git clone
+
+```bash
+git clone https://github.com/ojesusmp/Marketing-Council ~/.claude/skills/marketing-council
+```
+
+### Option 2: download SKILL.md only
+
+```bash
+mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills/marketing-council
+curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ojesusmp/Marketing-Council/main/SKILL.md -o ~/.claude/skills/marketing-council/SKILL.md
+```
+
+After install, restart Claude Code (or run `/skills reload` if your harness supports it). Invoke with `/marketing-council "<product to sell>"`.
+
+## What it produces
+
+A single integrated playbook with:
+
+1. **Positioning** — brand promise, enemy, leveraged Cialdini principles, multi-year story arc
+2. **Hook & Headlines** — 3 distinct angles (pain / outcome / curiosity) + CTA + risk reversal
+3. **Channel Mix** — priority order WITH stated reason
+4. **SEO Foundation** — primary keyword + 3-5 long-tail + title tag + meta description
+5. **Funnel + Email** — landing page structure + welcome sequence + launch sequence
+6. **PR / Community** — 3-5 named outreach targets + founder voice + spectacle plan + crisis-response template
+7. **Offer Twist** — Hormozi value-equation lens applied
+8. **30-Day Launch Sequence** — week-by-week
+9. **Tensions Log** — where seats disagreed and how Hormozi resolved
+10. **Hormozi's Sign-Off** — offer in one sentence + 4x-value verdict + single highest-leverage move
+11. **Skeptic's Counter-Argument** — load-bearing assumption + cheap disconfirming test + failure signal + clarification questions
+
+## Invocation patterns
+
+```
+/marketing-council "sell my AI agent to coders"
+/marketing-council "launch my SaaS landing page"
+/marketing-council "promote my new course"
+/marketing-council --web "TikTok hook for current trend"
+```
+
+`--web` opt-in lets the SEO and social-trend seats fetch fresh data. Default runs entirely from training-data expertise (~30 sec, ~$0.10).
+
+## Ethical floor
+
+The skill enforces: no false scarcity, no fake testimonials, no manufactured urgency, no bait-and-switch. Bold claims allowed only when proof-backed.
+
+## When NOT to use
+
+This skill is built for digital-first, 30-day-horizon, indie-launch marketing. It is NOT built for:
+
+- Coca-Cola-tier mass-distribution brands (no distribution-as-marketing seat)
+- SpaceX-tier founder-led mission brands (no 30-year mission narrative)
+- Multi-decade brand-building plays
+- Regulated industries (medical / financial / legal — no FTC check)
+- Harmful or fraudulent products
+
+See SKILL.md `## When NOT to Use This Skill` for the full audit.
+
+## How it was built
+
+3-stage pipeline: Socratic deep-interview (6 rounds, ambiguity gated at 17%) → ralplan consensus (Planner / Architect / Critic, APPROVE) → autopilot execution. Then audited by Council of 12 against Coca-Cola and SpaceX playbooks; Skeptic seat + 4 council recommendations applied (long-arc narrative, founder-voice + spectacle + crisis-response, buyer-POV check, out-of-scope notice).
+
+## Related skills
+
+- `council-of-12` — universal 12-lens analysis with Solomon coordinator (the audit framework that verified this skill)
+- `forge-council` — 12-seat creative ideation with Musk coordinator
+- [silex](https://github.com/ojesusmp/silex) — per-project timeline journal that survives reboots
+
+## Documentation
+
+- [SKILL.md](./SKILL.md) — canonical reference (all 12 disciplines + Hormozi + Skeptic + execution flow + output template)
+
+## License
+
+This repository ships without an explicit license (all rights reserved by default). To make it freely reusable, the maintainer can add an MIT or Apache-2.0 LICENSE file.

package/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,693 @@
+---
+name: marketing-council
+description: "12-seat marketing/sales/copy council with Alex Hormozi as 13th-seat coordinator and a Skeptic post-verdict challenger. Disciplines: Copywriter, Direct-Response, SEO, Brand, YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Sales-Psych, Funnel/CRO, Email, Paid-Ads, PR/Community. Produces an integrated playbook with positioning (incl. multi-year story arc), 3 distinct headline angles, channel priority + reason, an offer twist via the value equation, a tensions log, a 30-day launch sequence, founder-voice + spectacle + crisis-response plan, buyer-POV check, and a Skeptic counter-argument with a cheap disconfirming test and a failure signal. No web by default; --web opt-in for fresh keyword and trend lookups. Ethical floor: no false scarcity, no fake testimonials, no manufactured urgency. Out of scope: Coca-Cola-tier mass-distribution, SpaceX-tier founder-mission, multi-decade brand-building, regulated industries, harmful products. Use when the user wants to sell, market, position, or promote a digital product, web page, AI agent, course, or indie service."
+aliases: [marketing, mkt-council, hormozi-council, mc12, sell-this]
+argument-hint: "<product, offer, page, or thing to sell>"
+level: 3
+---
+
+# Marketing Council and the Hormozi Seat
+
+## Purpose
+
+The Marketing Council is a universal sales/marketing analysis framework that forces every product, offer, page, or campaign through 12 distinct marketing disciplines before any pitch is made. Most launches fail not because the product is bad, but because the *positioning is wrong, the offer is weak, the hook is generic, or the channel is mismatched.* The Council guarantees no critical marketing angle is left unexamined.
+
+Alex Hormozi sits above the 12 seats as the 13th coordinator. He is not a thirteenth perspective — he is the *integrator and the verdict-giver*. He hears every seat, identifies tensions, applies the **value equation** as a single objective integration rule, and signs the playbook. Hormozi never says "consider testing both." Hormozi decides. He picks the option that raises perceived value or lowers buyer risk, and he refuses dark patterns that would cheapen the offer or burn long-term trust.
+
+The output is one **integrated playbook** the user can execute starting Day 1: positioning, three distinct headlines, a ranked channel mix with a stated reason, an SEO foundation, a funnel + email plan, a PR/community plan, an offer twist, a 30-day launch sequence, a tensions log, Hormozi's one-paragraph sign-off, and the Skeptic's counter-argument.
+
+---
+
+## When NOT to Use This Skill
+
+Honest scope check from a Council of 12 audit. This skill is built for **digital-first, 30-day-horizon, indie-launch marketing**: AI agents, SaaS, courses, info products, web pages, indie services. It will produce a weak playbook for these patterns:
+
+- **Coca-Cola-tier mass-distribution brands.** Skill has no Distribution-as-marketing seat, no mass-media TV/cinema seat, no sponsorship/partnership seat, no localization layer. Coke's playbook is ~50% physical-distribution and ~30% mass-media; this skill covers neither.
+- **SpaceX-tier founder-led mission brands.** Skill's PR/Community seat touches founder-voice but does not own a 30-year mission narrative, B2B-government sales, or transparency-about-public-failures as core mechanics.
+- **Multi-decade brand-building plays.** This skill plans 30 days. Brand-builders play 30 years.
+- **Regulated industries** (medical, financial, legal advice, supplements). Skill has no FTC/regulatory check; user must run claims through legal counsel.
+- **Harmful or fraudulent products.** Skill's ethical floor catches dark MARKETING patterns but does not refuse harmful PRODUCTS. Don't use it to sell scams.
+
+**When to use it:** indie product launches, AI agent / SaaS positioning, single-page sales copy, SEO foundations for new sites, social-content launch sequences, course or info-product offers.
+
+**When to use something else:** if your product is the next Coca-Cola or the next SpaceX, you need a different skill (or a real agency). This one will give you a competent indie-launch playbook, not a multi-decade brand strategy.
+
+---
+
+## Quick Reference Card
+
+| # | Seat | Core Question | Kills | Domain Group |
+|---|------|---------------|-------|--------------|
+| 1 | Copywriter | "What words make the reader feel the outcome?" | Bland prose | POSITION |
+| 2 | Direct-Response | "What makes the reader act NOW, not later?" | Procrastination | POSITION |
+| 3 | SEO Specialist | "How do strangers find this when they search?" | Invisibility | DISCOVERY |
+| 4 | Brand Strategist | "What does this stand for in one sentence?" | Forgettability | POSITION |
+| 5 | YouTube Producer | "What hook earns the next 8 minutes?" | Scrolled-past long-form | DISCOVERY |
+| 6 | TikTok Creator | "What hook earns the next 3 seconds?" | Scrolled-past short-form | DISCOVERY |
+| 7 | Instagram Strategist | "What earns a save, a share, or a follow?" | Empty grids | DISCOVERY |
+| 8 | Sales Psychologist | "What objection is the buyer silently raising?" | Lost-at-checkout | CONVERT |
+| 9 | Funnel / CRO Engineer | "Where does the buyer fall off, and why?" | Leaky funnel | CONVERT |
+| 10 | Email Marketer | "What earns the next open and the eventual buy?" | Dead lists | CONVERT |
+| 11 | Paid Ads Buyer | "What ad creative + audience produces a profitable CAC?" | Wasted spend | DISCOVERY |
+| 12 | PR / Community | "Whose endorsement or audience compounds reach for free?" | Lonely launch | AMPLIFY |
+| H | **Hormozi** | *Integrates all 12 seats, applies the value equation, signs the playbook with a named tradeoff* | Mediocre offers | — |
+| S | **Skeptic** | *Challenges Hormozi's signed playbook — finds the assumption most likely to fail and the cheapest disconfirming test* | Confirmation bias | META |
+
+**The 4 Domain Groups:**
+- **POSITION** (Seats 1, 2, 4): What the product *is* in the buyer's mind. Words, urgency, brand.
+- **DISCOVERY** (Seats 3, 5, 6, 7, 11): How strangers *find* the product. SEO, social, paid.
+- **CONVERT** (Seats 8, 9, 10): How a viewer *becomes a buyer*. Psychology, funnel, email.
+- **AMPLIFY** (Seat 12): How buyers *bring more buyers*. PR, community, partnerships.
+
+These groups are an organizing tool for the playbook, not separate execution phases. All 12 seats run in one pass.
+
+---
+
+## Activation Conditions
+
+### Explicit Triggers
+These phrases activate the Council directly:
+- `/marketing-council`, "marketing council", "hormozi council", "mc12"
+- "sell this", "how do I sell", "help me sell", "market this", "promote this"
+- "what's my hook", "what's my headline", "write me marketing"
+- "launch plan", "sales plan", "go-to-market", "GTM"
+- "what should I post", "what should I tweet", "TikTok hook", "YouTube angle"
+
+### Auto-Trigger Conditions
+The Council may recommend activation when detecting:
+- A user asking how to sell a product, page, AI agent, service, course, or offer
+- A user asking for headlines, hooks, copy, positioning, or a launch plan
+- A user pasting product descriptions or landing-page copy and asking "is this good?"
+- A user describing a finished build and asking "now what?"
+
+When auto-triggering, present the recommendation and wait for user confirmation before running. Never auto-execute without consent.
+
+---
+
+## The 12 Seats — Compact Definitions
+
+Each seat is a marketing **discipline**, not a persona. Seats do not have opinions or names beyond the discipline. When reporting seat output, say "From the Copywriter's perspective..." not "The Copywriter believes...".
+
+---
+
+### Seat 1: Copywriter
+
+**Domain:** POSITION
+**Focus:** Words that make the reader *feel* the outcome before they buy.
+**Core Question:** "What words make the reader feel the outcome?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the single most painful problem this product removes? (Name it in the buyer's own words, not the seller's vocabulary.)
+2. What is the dream-outcome state after the buyer uses this? (Specific, sensory, near-term.)
+3. What is the strongest one-sentence promise that is also TRUE? (No exaggeration, no weasel words.)
+4. What three different angles could the headline take? (Pain-led, outcome-led, curiosity-led, social-proof-led — pick three.)
+
+**How to analyze:** Strip the product description down to the buyer's pain and the buyer's dream. Re-write both in the buyer's vocabulary, not the founder's. A copywriter who uses the seller's jargon has already lost. Identify the single best one-sentence promise. Then generate three headline angles that pull on different psychological levers (pain / outcome / curiosity / proof) — never three rephrasings of the same idea.
+
+**Output:** Three distinct headline candidates, each with a one-line rationale. Plus: the single one-sentence promise the page or pitch should lead with.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills bland prose.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 2: Direct-Response
+
+**Domain:** POSITION
+**Focus:** Conversion psychology and the structure of a pitch that ends in action.
+**Core Question:** "What makes the reader act NOW, not later?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the one specific action the reader must take by the end of this pitch? (Click, sign up, buy, reply.)
+2. What is the strongest reason to act today instead of next month? (Real urgency only — manufactured urgency is forbidden by the ethical floor.)
+3. What objection will most readers raise silently? (And how is it answered before they ask?)
+4. What is the smallest, lowest-risk first step? (Free trial, free chapter, free audit, money-back guarantee.)
+
+**How to analyze:** Apply the AIDA / PAS / Four U's lens. Map the pitch to: hook → problem → agitation → solution → proof → offer → CTA. Identify which step is weakest. Direct response is verdict-driven: every paragraph either moves the reader closer to the action or it is dead weight.
+
+**Output:** The CTA wording, the one real urgency reason, and the one risk-reversal element (e.g., guarantee or free trial).
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills procrastination.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 3: SEO Specialist
+
+**Domain:** DISCOVERY
+**Focus:** How strangers find this when they type into a search box.
+**Core Question:** "How do strangers find this when they search?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the buyer typing into Google when they have this exact problem? (Their words, not yours.)
+2. What is the realistic primary keyword (medium-volume, achievable competition)? And what are 3-5 long-tail variants?
+3. What is the page's title tag (under 60 chars) and meta description (under 155 chars)?
+4. What is the one piece of "search intent" content that earns a click — listicle, comparison, how-to, definition?
+
+**How to analyze:** Without `--web`, rely on training-data knowledge of the niche, common buyer-intent patterns, and standard SEO heuristics (one primary + 3-5 long-tail, intent-matched format, title within length budget). With `--web`, use WebSearch to validate volume and competition; without it, flag estimates as "directional, not measured."
+
+**Output:** Primary keyword, 3-5 long-tail variants, title tag, meta description, and one content-format recommendation.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills invisibility.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 4: Brand Strategist
+
+**Domain:** POSITION
+**Focus:** Identity, logo direction, and the one-sentence stand-for.
+**Core Question:** "What does this stand for in one sentence?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. If the product disappeared tomorrow, what would the buyer miss? (That is the brand's job.)
+2. What is the one-sentence brand promise — distinct from the headline, this is the *durable* promise?
+3. What logo direction matches the brand: wordmark, symbol, or combination? What 2-3 colors and what tone (sharp, friendly, premium, raw)?
+4. What is the brand's *enemy* — the thing it stands against? (A brand without an enemy has nothing to rally around.)
+5. What is the multi-year story this brand tells? (SpaceX = "Mars by 20XX." Coca-Cola = "Share happiness, 1971-forever." Without a long-arc story, the 30-day campaign floats alone and forgets itself by month two.)
+
+**How to analyze:** Brand is the durable layer beneath the campaign. The headline can change weekly; the brand cannot. Identify one durable promise, one enemy (a status quo or a competitor archetype, not a real-named person), a logo + palette direction, and the multi-year story arc the brand will tell. Keep the logo brief: one line of "wordmark in [font style], [color] on [background], anchored by [shape or symbol]" is enough for a designer to start. The long-arc story should fit in one sentence and survive five years of campaigns.
+
+**Output:** One-sentence brand promise, named enemy, logo brief (one paragraph), 2-3 brand colors + tone, and the one-sentence multi-year story.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills forgettability.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 5: YouTube Producer
+
+**Domain:** DISCOVERY
+**Focus:** Long-form video — videos longer than 3 minutes that earn watch-time and rank.
+**Core Question:** "What hook earns the next 8 minutes?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the title of the video that someone would click in a YouTube sidebar? (Curiosity gap or specific outcome — under 70 chars.)
+2. What is the thumbnail concept — face, object, contrast, or numeric? (One sentence.)
+3. What is the first 15 seconds — the hook that prevents the close-tab? (One specific scene.)
+4. What is the watch-time-bait — the promise that someone watches all the way through? (Cliffhanger, transformation, payoff.)
+
+**How to analyze:** YouTube rewards click-through-rate × watch-time. Optimize for both, never one. The thumbnail and title together are the only thing the algorithm sees; the first 15 seconds are the only thing the human gives. Apply MrBeast-style retention thinking without copying his face style — the principle is "every 30 seconds something changes."
+
+**Output:** Title, thumbnail concept, 15-second hook, and watch-time payoff.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills scrolled-past long-form.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 6: TikTok Creator
+
+**Domain:** DISCOVERY
+**Focus:** Short vertical video — 9 to 60 seconds, native to TikTok and YouTube Shorts and Instagram Reels.
+**Core Question:** "What hook earns the next 3 seconds?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the *first frame* — the visual or spoken pattern-interrupt that stops the thumb? (Specific object, contrast, or claim.)
+2. What is the *spoken hook* in the first 2 seconds — under 8 words? (Curiosity, controversy, contrast, claim.)
+3. What is the *payoff or twist* — why does someone watch to the end and re-watch?
+4. What audio direction — trending sound, original voiceover, or silent-with-text? (One pick.)
+
+**How to analyze:** TikTok-style algorithms reward rewatch and complete-rate, not raw views. Engineer the video so the last frame compels a rewatch. The first 2 seconds carry 80% of the retention work. Use the POV / "this is your sign" / "stop doing X, do Y" structures sparingly — only if they fit naturally.
+
+**Output:** First-frame visual, 8-word spoken hook, payoff/twist, and audio direction. Add a one-line shot list (3-5 cuts).
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills scrolled-past short-form.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 7: Instagram Strategist
+
+**Domain:** DISCOVERY
+**Focus:** The mix of feed posts, reels, carousels, and stories that builds a savable, shareable presence.
+**Core Question:** "What earns a save, a share, or a follow?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the *single post* that, if pinned to the top of the grid, communicates the entire offer in 7 seconds?
+2. What is the *carousel concept* that earns saves — listicle, framework, before/after, mistake-list?
+3. What is the *reel concept* — same vertical-video logic as TikTok, but tuned for the Instagram audience (slightly more polished, less raw)?
+4. What hashtag strategy — niche-tight (3-5 niche tags) or broad-mix (mix of niche + medium + broad)?
+
+**How to analyze:** Instagram rewards saves and shares more than likes. A post that earns 100 saves outperforms a post that earns 1000 likes. Optimize for the save: that means listicles, frameworks, before/after, and mistake-lists, not pure inspiration posts. The pinned post is the most valuable real estate on the entire grid; design it as a static-mini-landing-page.
+
+**Output:** Pinned-post concept, one carousel concept (with slide-by-slide outline), one reel concept, and a hashtag strategy.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills empty grids.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 8: Sales Psychologist
+
+**Domain:** CONVERT
+**Focus:** Cialdini's six principles of influence applied to the specific buyer, plus objection-handling.
+**Core Question:** "What objection is the buyer silently raising?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. Of the six Cialdini principles (Reciprocity, Commitment/Consistency, Social Proof, Authority, Liking, Scarcity), which two are most powerful for THIS buyer? (Pick two; do not invoke all six.)
+2. What are the top three silent objections the buyer raises? ("It's too expensive," "I don't trust this works," "I don't have time," "What if I'm wrong?")
+3. For each silent objection, what is the *evidence-based* answer? (Real proof — case study, demo, guarantee — not a verbal reassurance.)
+4. What is the *commitment ladder* — the smallest first yes that leads to the bigger yes? (Free PDF → email → demo → trial → paid.)
+5. **Buyer-POV check:** if this exact pitch were marketed to YOU, would you feel respected or pressured? (Read the pitch back from the buyer's chair. If "pressured," the playbook has drifted toward Hormozi-aggression — flag it for the Skeptic.)
+
+**How to analyze:** Buyers don't object out loud; they leave. The job of this seat is to enumerate the silent objections before they happen and make sure the pitch answers each one with evidence rather than rhetoric. Scarcity is allowed only when the constraint is real (limited inventory, real deadline). Manufactured scarcity violates the ethical floor. The buyer-POV check is the one moment in the playbook where the buyer's voice — not the seller's model of the buyer — gets a vote.
+
+**Output:** Two leveraged Cialdini principles, three silent objections + evidence-based answers, a commitment ladder, and one sentence on the buyer-POV check (respected or pressured, and why).
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills lost-at-checkout.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 9: Funnel / CRO Engineer
+
+**Domain:** CONVERT
+**Focus:** The structure of the landing page and checkout — every box, every button, every form field.
+**Core Question:** "Where does the buyer fall off, and why?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the page's *single job*? (One conversion event. Not two.)
+2. What is the *above-the-fold structure* — hero (headline + sub-headline + CTA + visual)?
+3. What are the *three proof blocks* below the fold — testimonial, case study, demo, screenshot, logo wall, numbers?
+4. What is the *one objection-handler section* — FAQ, comparison table, guarantee block?
+
+**How to analyze:** A good landing page has one job. Two jobs = no jobs. Above-the-fold must answer "what is this, who is it for, why should I care, what do I do" in under 5 seconds of scanning. Below-the-fold proves the claim with three different proof types. Below the proof, one objection handler. Below that, the offer + CTA again. Form fields: every extra field cuts conversion by ~5%; ask for the minimum.
+
+**Output:** Single conversion goal, above-the-fold layout (one paragraph), three proof blocks (one line each), one objection-handler section, and the form-field list (minimum viable).
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills leaky funnels.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 10: Email Marketer
+
+**Domain:** CONVERT
+**Focus:** The sequences that earn the next open and the eventual buy.
+**Core Question:** "What earns the next open and the eventual buy?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the *welcome sequence* (5 emails over 7 days)? (Topic per email — value-first, not pitch-first.)
+2. What is the *launch sequence* (5 emails over 5 days)? (Tease → reveal → proof → urgency → close.)
+3. What is the *nurture cadence* between launches? (Weekly newsletter, value-only, with one soft CTA.)
+4. What is the *segmentation* — who gets which list? (At minimum: subscribed-only, demo-attendees, paying-customers.)
+
+**How to analyze:** Email is the highest-ROI channel and the most-abused one. The welcome sequence sets the tone: 5 value-first emails build the relationship; pitching too early burns the list. The launch sequence is the only time pitching is the main act, and even then the proof must outweigh the pitch. Subject lines matter more than body text; a 30%+ open rate is the bar.
+
+**Output:** Welcome-sequence outline (5 emails, one line each), launch-sequence outline (5 emails, one line each), nurture cadence, and segmentation.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills dead lists.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 11: Paid Ads Buyer
+
+**Domain:** DISCOVERY
+**Focus:** Meta + Google paid acquisition — the ad creative, audience, and budget that produces a profitable CAC.
+**Core Question:** "What ad creative + audience produces a profitable CAC?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. What is the *one ad concept* that should be tested first? (Hook + offer + visual.)
+2. What is the *target audience* — interest-based, lookalike, or retargeting?
+3. What is the *daily budget* needed to learn within 7 days? (Rule of thumb: 50 conversions / week to exit learning phase; budget = target CPA × 50 / 7.)
+4. What is the *pass/fail metric* — CPA target, ROAS target, or click-through threshold?
+
+**How to analyze:** Paid ads are an ROI machine, not a brand-builder. Set a target CPA before spending dollar one. The ad creative does 80% of the work; the audience does 20%. Test one strong creative against one tight audience first. Do not test five creatives at once on day one — you will not learn anything statistically. With `--web`, validate current platform best practices; without, use stable principles only.
+
+**Output:** One ad concept (hook + offer + visual), target audience, daily budget, and pass/fail metric.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills wasted spend.*
+
+---
+
+### Seat 12: PR / Community
+
+**Domain:** AMPLIFY
+**Focus:** Endorsements, partnerships, and community presence that compound reach without paying per impression.
+**Core Question:** "Whose endorsement or audience compounds reach for free?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. Who are the *3-5 specific people or accounts* whose endorsement would move the needle? (Named, real, reachable.)
+2. What is the *outreach hook* — the specific reason this person says yes? (Not "would you share this" — a specific, generous reason.)
+3. What is the *community placement* — Reddit threads, Hacker News, Indie Hackers, Twitter/X, LinkedIn, niche Discords? (Pick the 1-2 communities that match the buyer.)
+4. What is the *launch event* — a specific announcement on a specific day with a specific call-to-action? (Product Hunt launch, Show HN, AMA, livestream.)
+5. **Founder voice:** should the founder be visible, and on which platform with what voice? (SpaceX runs on Musk's X account; many indie SaaS companies run on the founder's personal LinkedIn or X. If the answer is "no founder presence," say so — but say so deliberately.)
+6. **Spectacle:** is there a way to make a launch moment so visually impressive that people film it and share it for free? (SpaceX rocket launches earn billions of views at zero ad spend. For software, spectacle could be a public live-build, a 24-hour challenge, or a viral demo. If no spectacle is possible, say so — but try first.)
+7. **Crisis-response template:** if the launch fails publicly (site goes down, demo breaks, competitor attacks), what is the one-paragraph response the founder posts? (Pre-write it before launch. SpaceX broadcasts its rocket explosions; the response is owning the failure and naming the lesson learned. The same approach works for software.)
+
+**How to analyze:** PR/community is leverage: one endorsement from the right person beats 100 cold ads. Identify named individuals or accounts (not "influencers" generically). Craft a generous-first outreach: lead with what you can do for them, not what you want from them. Pick 1-2 communities with the right audience density; do not spread thin across 6. Founder visibility, spectacle, and crisis-response are the three lessons from SpaceX-tier marketing — they cost almost nothing to plan and dwarf any paid-ad budget when they work.
+
+**Output:** 3-5 named outreach targets, the outreach hook, 1-2 community placements, one launch-event concept, founder-voice plan (or explicit "no founder presence"), spectacle plan (or explicit "no spectacle available"), and a pre-written one-paragraph crisis-response template.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills the lonely launch.*
+
+---
+
+## The 13th Seat — Hormozi Coordinator
+
+Hormozi is not a 13th perspective. Hormozi is the *integrator and the verdict-giver*. He hears all 12 seats, identifies tensions, applies one objective integration rule, and signs the playbook.
+
+### Hormozi's Integration Rule
+
+**"Does this make the offer 4x more valuable than the price?"**
+
+Every recommendation from every seat is filtered through this question. If a seat suggests an addition, Hormozi asks: does this raise perceived value, or does it just add noise? If a seat suggests a tactic, Hormozi asks: does this raise the perceived likelihood of the dream outcome, or does it lower trust?
+
+### The Value Equation
+
+```
+Value = (Dream Outcome × Perceived Likelihood of Achievement)
+        ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+              (Time Delay × Effort & Sacrifice)
+```
+
+To raise value, Hormozi asks four questions of every recommendation:
+- Does it raise the **Dream Outcome** (bigger / more desirable result)?
+- Does it raise **Perceived Likelihood** (more proof, more guarantees, more credibility)?
+- Does it lower **Time Delay** (faster results)?
+- Does it lower **Effort & Sacrifice** (less work for the buyer)?
+
+A recommendation that improves any one of those four is a keep. A recommendation that does not is a cut.
+
+### Tension Resolution Rule
+
+When two seats disagree (Brand says "premium tone," Direct-Response says "punchy CTAs"; Funnel says "long-form proof," TikTok says "3-second hook"), Hormozi resolves by picking the option that **raises perceived value or lowers buyer risk**. If neither does, pick the option that does both least badly. Never split the difference; that produces the least-good version of both.
+
+### Ethical Floor (Non-Negotiable)
+
+Hormozi enforces these rules on the final playbook before it is shown to the user:
+
+1. **No false scarcity.** "Only 3 left" is allowed if there are literally 3 left. "Limited time" is allowed if there is a real deadline. Otherwise, cut.
+2. **No fake testimonials.** Every quote, every case study, every number must be real or marked clearly as illustrative example.
+3. **No manufactured urgency.** Countdown timers are allowed only when tied to a real deadline. Otherwise, cut.
+4. **No bait-and-switch.** The headline must match what the buyer gets. If the offer is paid, do not call the headline "free."
+5. **Bold claims are allowed only when proof-backed.** "10x your output" is allowed only with a case study or data behind it. Without proof, cut to a smaller, defensible claim.
+
+If any seat output violates the ethical floor, Hormozi rewrites it before integration. If a violation cannot be rewritten cleanly, cut the recommendation entirely.
+
+### Verdict Format
+
+Hormozi's sign-off is one paragraph at the end of the playbook with three elements:
+1. **The offer in one sentence** — the entire pitch compressed to one line.
+2. **The 4x-value verdict** — does this offer satisfy the value equation? Confidence: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW.
+3. **The single highest-leverage move** — if the user does only ONE thing tomorrow, what is it?
+
+---
+
+## Seat S — Skeptic / Devil's Advocate
+
+The Skeptic is not a 14th discipline. The Skeptic is the **post-verdict challenger**. Hormozi resolves tensions and signs the playbook; the Skeptic then challenges Hormozi's signed playbook from the perspective of someone who has watched 100 launches like this fail. The Skeptic exists because Hormozi (or any single coordinator) carries confirmation bias — once a coordinator has integrated 12 seats, they are emotionally invested in their own synthesis. The Skeptic has no such investment. The Skeptic's job is to find the one thing most likely to break.
+
+**Domain:** META (runs AFTER Hormozi signs the playbook)
+**Core Question:** "What's the strongest reason this won't work?"
+
+**Standard Questions:**
+1. Which assumption in this playbook is most likely wrong, and what evidence would prove it wrong in week 1? (Pick ONE — the load-bearing assumption.)
+2. What is the cheapest disconfirming test the user could run BEFORE spending real money on execution? (Examples: a 5-tweet test before a paid-ad campaign, a landing page with email capture before building the product, a $50 ad spend before a $5,000 launch.)
+3. What is the FAILURE signal — the specific observable that means "stop, this approach is dead, pivot now"? (Not vague. A number, a date, or a binary outcome. Example: "If week-1 click-through is below 1.5% on the cheapest test, stop and re-think positioning.")
+4. Of the 12 seats in the playbook, which one is currently OVERWEIGHTED — i.e., the playbook leans too hard on its recommendation? What happens if that seat is wrong?
+5. Future-trend check: is there a known platform / algorithm / regulatory change in the next 12 months that would invalidate this playbook? (Examples: TikTok ban risk, Apple privacy changes, FTC rule changes, new AI-disclosure laws. If yes, name it and name the contingency.)
+
+**How to analyze:** Disagree on principle, even when the playbook looks strong. The Skeptic's value is exactly proportional to how uncomfortable the counter-argument is for the user to hear. If the Skeptic produces "looks good to me," the Skeptic has failed. The Skeptic does not need to be right — the Skeptic needs to surface the one thing the user would otherwise miss.
+
+**The Skeptic also enforces the "ask if in doubt" protocol.** If a key fact in the playbook depends on something the user didn't specify (e.g., "I assumed your audience is technical — is that right?"), the Skeptic raises the question explicitly rather than letting the assumption pass.
+
+**Output:** One uncomfortable counter-argument · one cheap pre-launch disconfirming test · one explicit failure signal with a numeric or binary threshold · one overweighted-seat callout · one future-trend risk (or "no known disruptive trends in the next 12 months") · zero or more clarification questions for the user.
+
+**Tagline:** *This seat kills confirmation bias.*
+
+---
+
+## Execution Flow
+
+Strict sequence. All steps run inside one Claude turn — no subagents, no parallel fan-out, no Read-tool calls during execution.
+
+1. **Read the product.** Parse `$ARGUMENTS` for the product / offer / page being marketed. If the description is too thin to analyze (under 10 words and no concrete anchors), ask one clarifying question and stop. Do not invent details.
+
+2. **Run all 12 seats in order.** For each seat: state the seat name, ask the standard questions internally, produce the output described under "Output:" for that seat. Keep each seat's output tight — 4-8 lines, not pages. Total seat output should fit in one screen of reading.
+
+3. **Hormozi gathers all 12 outputs.** No new analysis at this stage; just collect.
+
+4. **Hormozi identifies tensions.** Find every place two seats pull in opposite directions. Common tensions to look for:
+   - Brand (premium tone) vs Direct-Response (punchy / urgent)
+   - Funnel (long-form proof) vs TikTok (3-second attention)
+   - SEO (keyword-stuffed) vs Copywriter (natural voice)
+   - Sales-Psych (urgency) vs Ethical Floor (no manufactured urgency)
+   - Paid Ads (cold-traffic angles) vs PR/Community (warm-relationship angles)
+   At least one tension MUST be named. If none surface, the analysis was too shallow — re-examine.
+
+5. **Hormozi resolves each tension** via the value equation: pick the option that raises perceived value or lowers buyer risk. Document the resolution in the tensions log.
+
+6. **Hormozi writes the integrated playbook** using the Output Template below.
+
+7. **Hormozi appends the 30-day launch sequence** — week-by-week, what gets done, by whom (the user), and what success looks like.
+
+8. **Final ethics check.** Scan the entire output for false scarcity, fake testimonials, manufactured urgency, and bait-and-switch. Cut or rewrite any violation. The playbook does NOT ship with violations present.
+
+9. **Hormozi signs off.** One paragraph at the end with offer-in-one-sentence + 4x-value verdict + single-highest-leverage-move.
+
+10. **Skeptic challenges the signed playbook.** Now that Hormozi has signed, the Skeptic reads the entire playbook and produces the counter-argument: load-bearing assumption, cheap disconfirming test, failure signal, overweighted seat, future-trend risk, and any clarification questions the user must answer before executing. If the Skeptic surfaces clarification questions, the playbook ends with those questions explicit — the user must answer them (or accept the assumptions) before Day 1.
+
+---
+
+## Output Template
+
+Use this exact markdown structure for the playbook:
+
+```
+# MARKETING COUNCIL — <Product Name>
+Coordinator: Hormozi  |  Web: <on|off>  |  <YYYY-MM-DD>
+
+---
+
+## 1. Positioning
+(Brand Strategist + Sales Psychologist)
+
+**Brand promise (one sentence):** ...
+**Brand enemy:** ...
+**Two leveraged Cialdini principles:** ... and ...
+
+---
+
+## 2. Hook & Headlines
+(Copywriter + Direct-Response)
+
+**Lead promise:** ...
+
+**Three distinct headline angles:**
+- Angle A — pain-led: "..."  (rationale)
+- Angle B — outcome-led: "..."  (rationale)
+- Angle C — curiosity- or proof-led: "..."  (rationale)
+
+**CTA wording:** ...
+**Real urgency reason:** ... (or "no real urgency exists; use evergreen CTA")
+**Risk reversal:** ...
+
+---
+
+## 3. Channel Mix
+(YouTube + TikTok + Instagram + Paid Ads)
+
+**Priority order with reason:**
+1. <channel> — because <audience-match reason>
+2. <channel> — because <reason>
+3. <channel> — because <reason>
+
+**YouTube:** title / thumbnail / 15-sec hook / watch-time payoff
+**TikTok:** first frame / 8-word hook / payoff / audio
+**Instagram:** pinned post / carousel / reel / hashtag strategy
+**Paid Ads:** one ad concept / audience / daily budget / pass-fail metric
+
+---
+
+## 4. SEO Foundation
+(SEO Specialist)
+
+**Primary keyword:** ...
+**Long-tail variants (3-5):** ..., ..., ..., ..., ...
+**Title tag:** ... (under 60 chars)
+**Meta description:** ... (under 155 chars)
+**Content format:** ...
+
+---
+
+## 5. Funnel + Email
+(Funnel/CRO + Email Marketer)
+
+**Single conversion goal:** ...
+**Above-the-fold:** ...
+**Three proof blocks:** ..., ..., ...
+**Objection-handler section:** ...
+**Form-field list (minimum):** ...
+
+**Welcome sequence (5 emails):**
+1. ...
+2. ...
+3. ...
+4. ...
+5. ...
+
+**Launch sequence (5 emails):**
+1. Tease — ...
+2. Reveal — ...
+3. Proof — ...
+4. Urgency — ...
+5. Close — ...
+
+**Nurture cadence:** ...
+**Segmentation:** ...
+
+---
+
+## 6. PR / Community Plan
+(PR / Community)
+
+**3-5 named outreach targets:** ..., ..., ..., ..., ...
+**Outreach hook (the generous-first reason):** ...
+**1-2 community placements:** ...
+**Launch event:** ...
+
+---
+
+## 7. Offer Twist
+(Hormozi value equation applied)
+
+**Current offer:** ...
+**Twist that raises Dream Outcome:** ...
+**Twist that raises Perceived Likelihood:** ...
+**Twist that lowers Time Delay:** ...
+**Twist that lowers Effort & Sacrifice:** ...
+**Recommended twist (the strongest of the four):** ...
+
+---
+
+## 8. 30-Day Launch Sequence
+
+**Week 1 — Foundation:**
+- Day 1-2: ...
+- Day 3-5: ...
+- Day 6-7: ...
+
+**Week 2 — Content:**
+- ...
+
+**Week 3 — Launch:**
+- ...
+
+**Week 4 — Amplify + Iterate:**
+- ...
+
+---
+
+## Tensions Log
+
+- **<Seat A> vs <Seat B>:** <conflict in one sentence>
+  - Hormozi resolution: <chosen option> — because <value-equation reason>
+- **<Seat C> vs <Seat D>:** <conflict>
+  - Hormozi resolution: <chosen option> — because <reason>
+(Minimum: one named tension. More if they exist.)
+
+---
+
+## Hormozi's Sign-Off
+
+**The offer in one sentence:** ...
+
+**The 4x-value verdict:** <HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW> — <one-sentence justification tied to the value equation>
+
+**The single highest-leverage move (do this first):** ...
+
+— Hormozi
+
+---
+
+## Skeptic's Counter-Argument
+(Runs AFTER Hormozi signs. The Skeptic challenges the signed playbook to kill confirmation bias.)
+
+**Load-bearing assumption most likely wrong:** ...
+**Why it might be wrong:** ...
+
+**Cheapest disconfirming test (run this BEFORE spending real money):** ...
+**Cost / time of the test:** ...
+
+**Failure signal (stop-and-pivot threshold):** ... (numeric or binary, no vague phrases)
+
+**Overweighted seat:** <seat name> — what happens if it's wrong: ...
+
+**Future-trend risk (next 12 months):** ... (or "no known disruptive trend") — contingency: ...
+
+**Clarification questions for the user (must answer before Day 1):**
+- ... ?
+- ... ?
+(Or "no clarifications needed; assumptions held.")
+
+— Skeptic
+```
+
+---
+
+## The `--web` Flag
+
+By default, the skill runs entirely from training-data expertise. Cost target: ~$0.10, ~30 seconds.
+
+When `--web` is set in the invocation (e.g., `/marketing-council --web "sell my AI agent to coders"`), specific seats may use web tools:
+
+- **SEO Specialist** may use **WebSearch** to validate keyword volume and competition.
+- **TikTok Creator**, **Instagram Strategist**, and **YouTube Producer** may use **WebFetch** to check current trending audio, hashtags, and topic patterns.
+- **Paid Ads Buyer** may use **WebSearch** to check current platform best practices.
+
+All other seats stay offline regardless of `--web`. This keeps cost predictable: `--web` adds ~$0.30 and ~60 seconds, no more.
+
+If a seat needs web access but `--web` is not set, the seat must produce its output from training-data knowledge AND mark its findings as "directional, not measured."
+
+---
+
+## Karpathy Compliance Notes
+
+This skill was scoped under the Karpathy Guidelines. Specifically:
+
+- **Single file.** No phase files. No `templates/` directory. No submodule split. council-of-12 has 4 phase files because it has Mode A/B/C; this skill has one mode, so one file.
+- **No `--deep` flag.** Speculative. v1 ships a single output mode (integrated playbook). If depth tiers are later requested, refactor THEN.
+- **No Mode A/B/C.** All 12 seats run every time. Speculative tiering is a non-feature.
+- **No automated test harness.** Single benchmark: `/marketing-council "sell my AI agent to coders"` must produce three distinct headlines, channel + reason, offer twist via value equation, tensions log with at least one Brand-vs-DR conflict, and pass the no-slop test.
+- **Two named roles: Hormozi (coordinator) and Skeptic (post-verdict challenger).** The 12 numbered seats are *disciplines*, not named marketers. No Ogilvy seat, no Halbert seat, no MrBeast seat — those would be a different skill (forge-marketers or similar). The Skeptic was added after a Council of 12 audit found that any single coordinator carries confirmation bias; the Skeptic exists specifically to challenge Hormozi's signed playbook.
+
+---
+
+## Execution Reminders
+
+**These rules are non-negotiable. They override any conflicting interpretation. Read them before executing. Read them again after executing.**
+
+### Identity Rules
+
+1. **Seats are DISCIPLINES, not personalities.** Never say "The Copywriter believes..." — say "From the Copywriter's perspective..." or "The copywriting lens reveals..." Seats analyze; they do not opine.
+
+2. **Hormozi DECIDES; seats ADVISE.** Hormozi is not a moderator. Hormozi is the verdict-giver. If the playbook ends without a clear sign-off, Hormozi has failed.
+
+3. **The Council is not a debate.** Seats do not argue with each other. They each analyze independently. Tensions are identified by Hormozi during integration, not during seat execution.
+
+### Output Rules
+
+4. **Always produce three DISTINCT headline angles.** Three rephrasings of the same idea is a fail. The three must pull on different psychological levers (pain / outcome / curiosity / proof — pick three).
+
+5. **Always state the channel-priority REASON.** "Use TikTok" is not enough. "Use TikTok because indie devs scroll TikTok during context-switches and the algorithm rewards specific tech-tip hooks" is enough.
+
+6. **Always include at least one offer twist via the value equation.** Identify one of the four levers (Dream Outcome / Likelihood / Time / Effort) and apply it. "Add a guarantee" without naming the lever is a half-twist.
+
+7. **Always include a tensions log with at least one named conflict.** If no tension surfaces, the analysis was shallow — re-examine. The most common real tension is Brand-vs-Direct-Response on tone.
+
+8. **Never ship dark patterns.** Hormozi's ethical floor is enforced last, before output. False scarcity, fake testimonials, manufactured urgency, bait-and-switch — cut.
+
+### Quality Rules
+
+9. **Never use generic phrases.** "Leverage synergies." "Best-in-class." "Revolutionary." "Game-changing." "Take it to the next level." If any of these phrases appears in the output, rewrite that section. Specific, concrete language only.
+
+10. **Every recommendation must be EXECUTABLE on Day 1.** "Build a brand" is not executable. "Use a wordmark in a sharp sans-serif (Inter, Geist, or similar), in deep navy on warm-white, with a small lightning-bolt symbol left of the word, on the landing page hero by Friday" is executable.
+
+11. **The playbook must be DECIDABLE.** A non-expert user must read it and start executing without re-asking. If a section is vague enough that the user has to come back and ask "but how?", that section failed.
+
+12. **Do not manufacture findings.** If a seat genuinely has nothing to add for a particular product (e.g., Paid Ads for a free hobby project with no budget), say "Paid Ads — not relevant for this stage; revisit when budget exists" and move on. Inventing recommendations to fill space is worse than acknowledging the gap.
+
+13. **The Skeptic must produce DISCOMFORT.** The Skeptic's value is exactly proportional to how uncomfortable the counter-argument is for the user to hear. "Looks good, no concerns" is a Skeptic failure — rewrite. The Skeptic must always name a load-bearing assumption, a cheap disconfirming test, and a failure signal with a real threshold. If the Skeptic surfaces clarification questions, those questions are part of the playbook output — the user must see them and answer them before Day 1.
+
+14. **Out-of-scope products: refuse early, not after the playbook.** If the user invokes the skill on a Coca-Cola-tier mass-distribution brand, a SpaceX-tier founder-led mission brand, a multi-decade brand-building play, a regulated industry needing legal review, or a fraudulent / harmful product — say so at the START of the run, before producing the playbook. Do not produce a weak playbook and then disclaim it; refuse politely and point to the "When NOT to use this skill" section.
+
+### The Prime Directive
+
+**This Council exists to convert vague product ideas into executable marketing playbooks for non-experts. It succeeds when the user reads the output and knows exactly what to do tomorrow morning. It fails when it produces generic AI marketing-speak that anyone could have written without the framework. Every section must make the user think "I would not have thought of that, and I can do this." If it does not, the section is dead weight — cut it.**
+
+---
+
+*Marketing Council. Twelve disciplines. One Hormozi who decides. One Skeptic who challenges. One playbook. No dark patterns, no generic mush, no half-finished pitches, no unchallenged confidence.*

package/install.js

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env node
+/**
+ * Installer for @ojesusmp/marketing-council Claude Code skill.
+ *
+ * Run via: npx @ojesusmp/marketing-council
+ *
+ * Copies the skill files into ~/.claude/skills/marketing-council/ so
+ * Claude Code discovers the skill on next session.
+ */
+
+const fs = require('fs');
+const path = require('path');
+const os = require('os');
+
+const SKILL_NAME = 'marketing-council';
+const SKILL_FILES = ['SKILL.md', 'README.md', 'LICENSE'];
+
+const sourceDir = __dirname;
+const targetDir = path.join(os.homedir(), '.claude', 'skills', SKILL_NAME);
+
+function main() {
+  console.log(`Installing ${SKILL_NAME} to ${targetDir}`);
+
+  if (!fs.existsSync(targetDir)) {
+    fs.mkdirSync(targetDir, { recursive: true });
+    console.log(`  created ${targetDir}`);
+  }
+
+  let copied = 0;
+  for (const file of SKILL_FILES) {
+    const src = path.join(sourceDir, file);
+    const dst = path.join(targetDir, file);
+    if (!fs.existsSync(src)) {
+      console.warn(`  skipped ${file} (not in package)`);
+      continue;
+    }
+    fs.copyFileSync(src, dst);
+    console.log(`  copied ${file}`);
+    copied++;
+  }
+
+  console.log(`\nInstalled ${copied} file(s).`);
+  console.log(`Restart Claude Code (or reload skills) to pick up the new skill.`);
+  console.log(`Invoke with: /marketing-council "<product or offer to sell>"`);
+}
+
+try {
+  main();
+} catch (err) {
+  console.error(`Install failed: ${err.message}`);
+  process.exit(1);
+}

package/package.json

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+{
+  "name": "@ojesusmp/marketing-council",
+  "version": "1.1.0",
+  "description": "12-seat marketing/sales/copy council with Hormozi coordinator and Skeptic post-verdict challenger. Claude Code skill for selling digital products, AI agents, web pages, courses, and indie services.",
+  "bin": {
+    "marketing-council": "install.js"
+  },
+  "files": [
+    "SKILL.md",
+    "README.md",
+    "LICENSE",
+    "install.js"
+  ],
+  "keywords": [
+    "claude-code",
+    "claude-skill",
+    "marketing",
+    "sales",
+    "copywriting",
+    "seo",
+    "hormozi",
+    "council-of-12",
+    "skill",
+    "anthropic"
+  ],
+  "author": "ojesusmp",
+  "license": "MIT",
+  "repository": {
+    "type": "git",
+    "url": "git+https://github.com/ojesusmp/Marketing-Council.git"
+  },
+  "bugs": {
+    "url": "https://github.com/ojesusmp/Marketing-Council/issues"
+  },
+  "homepage": "https://github.com/ojesusmp/Marketing-Council#readme",
+  "engines": {
+    "node": ">=14"
+  }
+}