demiurge-peitho 0.1.0

package/lib/pipeline.js

@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+'use strict';
+// pipeline.js, Law 2 made mechanical: positioning before copy.
+// A model asked to "write a landing page" will happily write one. This refuses
+// to let the assets stage run until the wedge exists and every angle carries a test.
+
+// Dunford positioning components. All five, or you do not have positioning,
+// you have adjectives.
+const POSITIONING_FIELDS = ['alternatives', 'uniqueAttributes', 'value', 'customerSegment', 'marketCategory'];
+
+function validatePositioning(p) {
+  const missing = [];
+  for (const f of POSITIONING_FIELDS) {
+    const v = p ? p[f] : undefined;
+    const empty = v == null || (typeof v === 'string' && !v.trim()) || (Array.isArray(v) && v.length === 0);
+    if (empty) missing.push(f);
+  }
+  return { ok: missing.length === 0, missing };
+}
+
+// Law 3: an angle without a cheapest test is a guess wearing a suit.
+function validateAngles(angles) {
+  const list = Array.isArray(angles) ? angles : [];
+  const untested = list.filter((a) => !a || !a.test || !String(a.test).trim() || !a.metric || !String(a.metric).trim());
+  return {
+    ok: list.length > 0 && untested.length === 0,
+    count: list.length,
+    untested: untested.map((a) => (a && a.angle) || '(unnamed angle)'),
+  };
+}
+
+// The offer must carry a price and the objections that would kill it.
+function validateOffer(o) {
+  const missing = [];
+  if (!o || o.price == null || String(o.price).trim() === '') missing.push('price');
+  if (!o || !Array.isArray(o.objections) || o.objections.length === 0) missing.push('objections');
+  return { ok: missing.length === 0, missing };
+}
+
+// Mode 0, what to sell (harvested from prompt #22). An idea without a named
+// buyer, a first-ten-customers plan, unit economics and a cheap risk test is a
+// daydream. Every field here is something the prompt demands and a founder skips.
+const IDEA_FIELDS = ['pitch', 'buyer', 'firstTen', 'cost', 'unitEconomics', 'risk', 'riskTest'];
+
+function validateIdea(idea) {
+  const missing = [];
+  for (const f of IDEA_FIELDS) {
+    const v = idea ? idea[f] : undefined;
+    const empty = v == null || (typeof v === 'string' && !v.trim()) || (Array.isArray(v) && v.length === 0);
+    if (empty) missing.push(f);
+  }
+  return { ok: missing.length === 0, missing, name: (idea && idea.name) || '(unnamed idea)' };
+}
+
+// Screen a list of ideas: the ones that survive are the only ones worth positioning.
+function screenIdeas(ideas) {
+  const list = Array.isArray(ideas) ? ideas : [];
+  const results = list.map(validateIdea);
+  return {
+    ok: list.length > 0 && results.every((r) => r.ok),
+    count: list.length,
+    incomplete: results.filter((r) => !r.ok).map((r) => ({ name: r.name, missing: r.missing })),
+  };
+}
+
+// The gate on producing any asset.
+function canProduceAssets(state = {}) {
+  const pos = validatePositioning(state.positioning);
+  const angles = validateAngles(state.angles);
+  const offer = validateOffer(state.offer);
+  const blockers = [];
+  if (!pos.ok) blockers.push(`positioning incomplete: missing ${pos.missing.join(', ')}`);
+  if (!angles.ok) blockers.push(angles.count === 0 ? 'no angles named' : `angles without a cheapest test: ${angles.untested.join(', ')}`);
+  if (!offer.ok) blockers.push(`offer incomplete: missing ${offer.missing.join(', ')}`);
+  return { allowed: blockers.length === 0, blockers, positioning: pos, angles, offer };
+}
+
+module.exports = { validatePositioning, validateAngles, validateOffer, canProduceAssets, validateIdea, screenIdeas, POSITIONING_FIELDS, IDEA_FIELDS };

package/lib/siblings.js

@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+'use strict';
+// siblings.js: Demiurge sibling detection (PEI-10).
+// PEITHO writes the words and never grades its own pitch. The ship-gate needs
+// ZOILUS; the prose needs VERITAS; a visual surface needs CALLIOPE; any numeric
+// claim needs PYRRHO. Those four are the pairs worth recommending.
+const fs = require('fs');
+const path = require('path');
+const os = require('os');
+
+const SIBLINGS = {
+  zoilus:   'judges the copy as an artifact (PEITHO never grades its own pitch)',
+  veritas:  'anti-slop pass on the prose',
+  calliope: 'designs the frame (PEITHO writes the words, in that order)',
+  pyrrho:   'owns what the numbers say (no conversion claim ships without it)',
+  athena:   'decides whether to enter the market at all (PEITHO executes, it does not decide)',
+  chiron:   'turns a repeated rejection into a permanent rule',
+  horkos:   'proves the campaign actually shipped',
+  moneta:   'budgets the loop',
+  hypnos:   'memory consolidation',
+  maat:     'the dashboard',
+};
+
+// The ship-gate depends on these. Missing any one degrades the gate honestly.
+const NATURAL_PAIRS = ['zoilus', 'veritas', 'calliope', 'pyrrho'];
+
+// Which sibling owns a stage of the ship-gate, when installed.
+const GATE_ROUTE = {
+  'copy-critique': 'zoilus',
+  'anti-slop': 'veritas',
+  visual: 'calliope',
+  'numeric-claim': 'pyrrho',
+};
+
+function defaultSearchPaths() {
+  return [
+    path.join(os.homedir(), '.claude', 'skills'),
+    path.join(__dirname, '..', '..'),
+  ];
+}
+
+function detect(searchPaths) {
+  const paths = searchPaths || defaultSearchPaths();
+  const found = new Set();
+  for (const base of paths) {
+    if (!base || !fs.existsSync(base)) continue;
+    let entries = [];
+    try { entries = fs.readdirSync(base); } catch { continue; }
+    for (const name of entries) {
+      const key = name.toLowerCase();
+      if (SIBLINGS[key] && key !== 'peitho') {
+        try { if (fs.statSync(path.join(base, name)).isDirectory()) found.add(key); } catch { /* skip */ }
+      }
+    }
+  }
+  const installed = Object.keys(SIBLINGS).filter((k) => found.has(k));
+  const missing = Object.keys(SIBLINGS).filter((k) => !found.has(k));
+  return { installed, missing };
+}
+
+function recommend(installed) {
+  const have = new Set(installed || detect().installed);
+  return NATURAL_PAIRS.filter((k) => !have.has(k)).map((k) => ({ name: k, why: SIBLINGS[k] }));
+}
+
+// Route a ship-gate stage to its owner. Missing sibling degrades honestly: the
+// stage is skipped and named, never silently passed.
+function routeGate(stage, installed) {
+  const have = new Set(installed || detect().installed);
+  const god = GATE_ROUTE[stage];
+  if (!god) return 'peitho-native';
+  return have.has(god) ? god : `SKIPPED (${god} not installed)`;
+}
+
+module.exports = { detect, recommend, routeGate, SIBLINGS, NATURAL_PAIRS, GATE_ROUTE };

package/package.json

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+{
+  "name": "demiurge-peitho",
+  "version": "0.1.0",
+  "description": "Your marketing copy sounds like everyone else's. PEITHO won't let it.",
+  "bin": { "peitho": "bin/peitho.js" },
+  "scripts": { "test": "node benchmarks/run.js" },
+  "keywords": ["marketing", "positioning", "copywriting", "go-to-market", "launch", "claude", "agent-skill", "demiurge"],
+  "author": "Eragon Lee",
+  "license": "MIT",
+  "repository": { "type": "git", "url": "https://github.com/eragonlonelyboy-lab/peitho" },
+  "files": ["bin", "lib", "references", "docs", "SKILL.md", "CLAUDE.md", "LICENSE", "README.md"]
+}

package/references/assets/ads.md

@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+# Ads (Ad Copy Variations to Test)
+
+## Role framing
+A performance marketer and direct-response copywriter who has spent real budget and knows that the winning ad usually comes from testing angles, not tweaking words. Writes native, scroll-native copy for each platform and designs tests that isolate the angle.
+
+## Intake
+
+CONTEXT inputs required:
+- Product or offer: [PRODUCT OR OFFER]
+- Audience: [WHO IT TARGETS]
+- Platform: [PLATFORM, e.g. Meta feed, Google Search, TikTok, LinkedIn]
+- Offer and CTA: [WHAT THEY GET AND THE ACTION]
+- Proof I have: [RESULTS, NUMBERS, TESTIMONIALS, or 'none']
+
+Clarifying-question rule (verbatim in substance):
+"BEFORE writing, ask me up to 3 clarifying questions only if these are missing: the single most desired outcome my customer wants, the main objection that stops the click, and the offer or CTA (free trial, purchase, lead form). Otherwise proceed."
+
+The three permitted questions, only when missing:
+1. The single most desired outcome the customer wants.
+2. The main objection that stops the click.
+3. The offer or CTA (free trial, purchase, lead form).
+
+## Output structure
+
+Write 8 ad variations, each using a DIFFERENT angle. Numbered 1-8. For EACH variation, provide these four labeled parts:
+
+- The angle label.
+- Primary text (body copy sized to the platform).
+- A punchy headline.
+- The one CTA button or line.
+
+Then a "Test first" section containing:
+- The 2 variations recommended to test first.
+- Why those angles are the highest-signal bets.
+- The exact metric that would prove an angle is working.
+
+## Named angles
+
+All eight, one per variation:
+
+1. Pain-point callout
+2. Desired-outcome
+3. Curiosity gap
+4. Social proof
+5. Urgency or scarcity (only if genuinely true)
+6. Pattern interrupt
+7. Us-vs-the-old-way
+8. A direct question that names the audience
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Lead with the hook in the first line. Tight, human, no fluff.
+- Match the length and native style of the given [PLATFORM].
+- Only use urgency or claims that are actually true. No fabricated scarcity, no fake testimonials.
+- No hype words like unleash or game-changer.
+- No em dashes.
+- Output format: numbered 1-8 with the four parts labeled, then the "Test first" section with the two picks, the reasoning, and the metric.
+
+## Quality bar
+
+The 8 angles must be genuinely distinct, not the same message reworded. If two feel similar, replace one.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+A "Test first" section that names which two variations to test first, explains why those angles are the highest-signal bets, and names the exact metric that would prove an angle is working. Metric-mapping examples given in the source:
+- Click-through rate for hook strength.
+- Cost per lead for offer strength.
+- Hook-hold rate for video.
+
+## Source
+Harvested from prompt #76 ("Ad Copy Variations to Test", Business & Marketing, Any LLM) of the 145-library.

package/references/assets/business-ideas.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+# Business Ideas Built for Me
+
+Persona: a startup advisor and angel investor who has evaluated thousands of businesses and personally launched several from zero. Blunt, numbers-driven, allergic to generic advice.
+
+## Intake
+
+Required inputs (context about me):
+- Skills and experience: [YOUR SKILLS]
+- Interests and topics I care about: [YOUR INTERESTS]
+- Time available per week: [HOURS PER WEEK]
+- Money I can invest to start: [STARTUP BUDGET]
+- Income goal and timeline: [TARGET INCOME AND BY WHEN]
+- Location or market I can serve: [LOCATION OR MARKET]
+
+Clarifying-question rule: BEFORE answering, if any of the above is blank or vague, ask up to 3 sharp clarifying questions first, then wait for my reply. If it is all clear, proceed.
+
+## Output structure
+
+Generate 7 business ideas I could realistically start given my exact situation.
+
+For each idea, use this exact format:
+1. Name and one-line pitch
+2. Who pays and why (the specific buyer and the pain it solves)
+3. First 10 customers: exactly where I would find them and what I would say
+4. Realistic startup cost and time to first dollar
+5. Business model and rough unit economics (price, cost, margin)
+6. The single biggest honest risk, and one way to test it cheaply this month
+
+Then: rank the top 3 by fit with my skills, budget, and goal, and explain in 2 to 3 sentences each why they win for ME specifically.
+
+## Named taxonomies
+
+None named. The six-part per-idea format above is the fixed structure.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Each idea must be specific to me, not a template. No "start a blog," "become a coach," or "open a store" without a concrete angle.
+- Fit the ideas to my real time and budget. Do not suggest something that needs 40 hours a week if I have 8.
+- Favor ideas with a fast path to first revenue over ideas that need a year of buildout.
+- Be direct. If an idea is a bad fit for me, say so.
+
+## Quality bar
+
+Be direct. If an idea is a bad fit for me, say so. Every idea must be specific to my situation rather than a template.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+- Rank the top 3 by fit with my skills, budget, and goal, with 2 to 3 sentences each on why they win for me specifically.
+
+## Source
+
+Harvested from prompt #22 of the 145-library, "Business Ideas Built for Me" (Creativity & Ideas, Any LLM).

package/references/assets/cold-outreach.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+# Cold Outreach Message
+
+Persona: an outbound strategist who has booked thousands of meetings with cold messages that read like they were written by hand to one person. Relevance beats flattery. The fastest path to a reply is making the ask small and the value obviously about them.
+
+## Intake
+
+Required inputs:
+- Recipient: [PERSON OR ROLE] at [COMPANY]
+- What I know about them: [SPECIFIC OBSERVATION, RECENT POST, LAUNCH, OR ROLE DETAIL]
+- My goal: [WHAT I WANT, e.g. a 15-minute call, a reply, a referral]
+- The value I create for people like them: [CONCRETE OUTCOME OR PROOF]
+- Channel: [EMAIL / LINKEDIN / X DM]
+
+Clarifying-question rule: BEFORE writing, if there is not enough to personalize, ask 1 to 3 quick questions: something specific and recent about the recipient or their company, the one concrete result I can help them get, and the channel (email, LinkedIn DM, X DM). Otherwise proceed.
+
+## Output structure
+
+1. Version 1, with the opening angle in parentheses. Under it, a one-line note on the type of recipient it fits best.
+2. Version 2, same format.
+3. Version 3, same format.
+4. Follow-up: one short message to send if they do not reply within 4 days.
+
+Each of the three versions opens with a different, genuine angle:
+- A specific observation about their work.
+- A relevant result I helped someone similar get.
+- A sharp question tied to their situation.
+
+## Named taxonomies
+
+The three opener angles: specific observation about their work, relevant result for someone similar, sharp question tied to their situation.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Under 90 words each.
+- The first line must prove I actually looked at them, not a mail merge.
+- Make the value about THEM, not my background. Cut every sentence that starts with 'I' where possible.
+- End with one low-friction ask (a yes/no question or a tiny next step), never 'let me know if you'd like to hop on a call'.
+- No fake flattery, no 'I hope this finds you well', no hype, no em dashes.
+- The follow-up must add a new angle or proof point, not just 'bumping this up'.
+
+## Quality bar
+
+If a message could be sent to 500 people unchanged, it fails. Make the opener impossible to copy-paste to anyone else.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+- A one-line fit note under each version naming the type of recipient it suits best.
+- The 4-day follow-up carrying a new angle or proof point.
+
+## Source
+
+Harvested from prompt #11 of the 145-library, "Cold Message That Gets Replies" (Business & Marketing, Any LLM).

package/references/assets/content-calendar.md

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+# 30-Day Content Calendar
+
+Persona: a content strategist who has grown accounts from zero to large and profitable. Calendars are built around a deliberate audience journey (awareness, trust, conversion), not random posting. Knows which formats drive reach versus which drive sales.
+
+## Intake
+
+Required inputs:
+- Platform: [PLATFORM]
+- Niche: [NICHE]
+- Audience: [WHO IT IS FOR]
+- My offer or goal: [WHAT I SELL OR THE ACTION I WANT]
+- My content pillars, if I have them: [3-5 THEMES, or write 'suggest some']
+
+Clarifying-question rule: BEFORE building, ask up to 3 clarifying questions only if these are missing: the one action the content should ultimately drive (follow, email signup, purchase), the audience's biggest pain and biggest desire, and any offer or launch happening this month. Otherwise proceed.
+
+## Output structure
+
+1. Pillar proposal: propose 3 to 5 content pillars that map to what the audience cares about and where the offer fits. Wait one line for the user to react, or if they said proceed, use them.
+2. Build a 30-day calendar structured across the journey, woven so it never feels salesy.
+3. Keep it 80 percent pure value and 20 percent promotional.
+4. For each of the 30 days provide: Day number, Journey stage, Content format, Hook or working title, Core idea in one line, and Call to action.
+5. Render as a clean markdown table with columns: Day, Stage, Format, Hook, Core Idea, CTA.
+6. Below the table, list the 5 posts most likely to drive the biggest results and why.
+
+## Named taxonomies
+
+Journey stages across the month:
+- Week 1, awareness: reach and relatability.
+- Week 2, trust: authority and proof.
+- Week 3, desire: transformation and stories.
+- Week 4, conversion: offer, objections, urgency.
+
+Content formats to vary across: how-to, story, hot take, list, behind-the-scenes, proof, myth-buster, question, carousel, short video, and similar.
+
+Value ratio: 80 percent pure value, 20 percent promotional.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Vary formats so no two adjacent days feel the same.
+- Hooks must be specific and scroll-stopping, not topic labels.
+- Match the tone and native format of [PLATFORM].
+- No hype words, no em dashes.
+
+## Quality bar
+
+Every hook must make the user want to open the post. If one reads like a placeholder, replace it.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+- The 5 posts most likely to drive the biggest results, each with the reason why, listed below the table.
+
+## Source
+
+Harvested from prompt #13 of the 145-library, "30 Days of Content in One Shot" (Business & Marketing, Any LLM).

package/references/assets/content-kit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+# Turn Audio Into a Content Kit
+
+Persona: a content repurposing specialist who turns one long recording into a week of assets. Finds the most quotable, clippable, and shareable moments in a transcript and packages them for each format without inventing anything.
+
+## Intake
+
+Required inputs:
+- Source type: [PODCAST / VIDEO / TALK / INTERVIEW]
+- Audience: [WHO LISTENS OR WATCHES]
+- My goal for the repurposed content: [e.g. grow the show, drive newsletter signups, sell an offer]
+- My voice or brand tone: [e.g. warm and plain-spoken, sharp and contrarian]
+- TRANSCRIPT: [PASTE TRANSCRIPT]
+
+Clarifying-question rule: the source prompt sets no clarifying-question step. Instead it sets a thinness rule: if a section is thin, say so rather than filling it.
+
+## Output structure
+
+Six labeled sections, in order:
+
+1. Title options: 3 compelling episode titles, plus a 3-sentence description that makes someone want to press play.
+2. Timestamped show notes: the key moments and topic shifts in order, each with its timestamp (use the transcript's timestamps if present, otherwise label 'approx') and a one-line summary.
+3. Quotable lines: the 5 most shareable, punchy lines pulled verbatim from the transcript, with the timestamp for each.
+4. Short-form clips: 3 clip ideas that would perform on Reels, Shorts, or TikTok. For each give the start and end reference, why it works, and the exact hook line to open the clip.
+5. Newsletter blurb: one short, warm paragraph summarizing the episode and pointing readers to it.
+6. Social captions: 2 platform-ready captions (one for X, one for LinkedIn or Instagram) drawn from the episode's best idea.
+
+## Named taxonomies
+
+The six sections: title options plus description, timestamped show notes, 5 verbatim quotable lines with timestamps, 3 clip ideas with start and end references plus hook line, newsletter blurb, 2 platform captions.
+
+Timestamp convention: use the transcript's timestamps if present, otherwise label 'approx'.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Use only what is actually in the transcript. Never invent quotes, stats, or claims. If a section is thin, say so rather than filling it.
+- Preserve the speaker's voice and meaning. Light cleanup of filler words is fine; do not change the substance.
+- No hype words, no em dashes.
+
+## Quality bar
+
+Every quote must be findable in the transcript word for word. Every clip hook must be strong enough to stop a scroll on its own.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+None beyond the six labeled sections. Thin sections are flagged as thin rather than padded.
+
+## Source
+
+Harvested from prompt #51 of the 145-library, "Turn Audio Into a Content Kit" (Business & Marketing, Any LLM).

package/references/assets/hooks.md

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+# Hooks (10 Scroll-Stopping Hooks)
+
+## Role framing
+A world-class direct-response copywriter and short-form content strategist who has written hooks that stopped millions of thumbs. Understands curiosity gaps, pattern interrupts, specificity, and the exact difference between a hook that earns the next three seconds and one that gets scrolled past.
+
+## Intake
+
+CONTEXT inputs required:
+- Topic: [YOUR TOPIC]
+- Audience: [WHO IT IS FOR]
+- Platform: [WHERE IT WILL BE POSTED, e.g. Instagram Reel, X post, cold email, YouTube intro]
+- Desired outcome after the hook: [KEEP WATCHING / KEEP READING / CLICK]
+
+Clarifying-question rule (verbatim in substance):
+"BEFORE writing, if any of the following is unclear, ask me up to 3 quick clarifying questions (platform, the single transformation or payoff the content delivers, and my audience's most painful frustration). If I gave you enough, skip the questions and proceed."
+
+So: at most 3 questions, and only when unclear. The three permitted question topics are exactly:
+1. Platform.
+2. The single transformation or payoff the content delivers.
+3. The audience's most painful frustration.
+
+## Output structure
+
+1. Ten hooks, numbered, each labeled with its angle in parentheses. One different psychological angle per hook, drawn from the named set below.
+2. After the list: rank the top 3 from strongest to weakest, explaining in one sentence each why it works and who it will grab.
+3. Flag any hook that risks overpromising, so the user can tighten it.
+
+## Named angles
+
+All ten, one per hook:
+
+1. Bold specific claim
+2. Surprising statistic
+3. Contrarian take
+4. Callout of a costly mistake
+5. Curiosity gap that withholds the payoff
+6. Before-and-after transformation
+7. Us-vs-them tribal line
+8. A confession
+9. A direct question that names their exact pain
+10. A "if you do X, this is for you" callout
+
+## Constraints
+
+- One or two short lines each, written the way a real person talks out loud.
+- Front-load the most interesting word. No wind-up, no "In this video".
+- Be specific: use numbers, timeframes, and concrete nouns instead of vague adjectives.
+- No clickbait that the content cannot deliver.
+- No hype words like unleash, game-changer, or revolutionary.
+- No em dashes.
+- Each hook must use a different psychological angle (no repeats across the ten).
+
+## Quality bar
+
+Every hook must be usable as-is with zero editing. If a hook feels generic, replace it before showing it to the user.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+- Top-3 ranking, strongest to weakest, each with a one-sentence why it works and who it will grab.
+- An explicit flag on any hook that risks overpromising, so it can be tightened.
+
+## Source
+Harvested from prompt #4 ("10 Scroll-Stopping Hooks", Business & Marketing, Any LLM) of the 145-library.

package/references/assets/landing-page.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+# Landing Page (High-Converting Landing Page)
+
+## Role framing
+A senior conversion copywriter who has written landing pages responsible for millions in revenue. Writes in the voice of the customer, leads with outcomes, and removes friction and doubt at every scroll depth.
+
+## Intake
+
+CONTEXT inputs required:
+- Product or offer: [PRODUCT OR OFFER]
+- Target customer: [WHO IT IS FOR, be specific]
+- Primary desired action: [e.g. start free trial, book a call, buy now]
+- Price or model: [PRICE OR PRICING MODEL]
+- Proof I have: [TESTIMONIALS, RESULTS, NUMBERS, CREDENTIALS, or write 'none yet']
+
+Clarifying-question rule (verbatim in substance):
+"BEFORE writing, ask me up to 3 clarifying questions only if these are missing: the single most desired outcome my customer wants, the main objection or fear that stops them from buying, and the specific mechanism that makes my offer work. If I already gave you enough, proceed."
+
+The three permitted questions, only when missing:
+1. The single most desired outcome the customer wants.
+2. The main objection or fear that stops them from buying.
+3. The specific mechanism that makes the offer work.
+
+## Output structure
+
+Write the full landing page copy, clearly labeling each section. All eleven sections, in order:
+
+1. Hero headline: names the specific outcome the customer wants, in their words.
+2. Subheadline: adds the mechanism (how it works) and removes the biggest doubt.
+3. Primary call-to-action button text plus one line of supporting microcopy.
+4. The problem section: agitate the current painful reality in 2-3 short lines that make them feel understood.
+5. The solution section: introduce the offer as the bridge from pain to outcome.
+6. Benefits: 5 bullets framed as results the customer gets, not features the builder made.
+7. How it works: 3 simple steps that make the path feel easy and obvious.
+8. Objections: the 3 biggest objections with a one-line answer to each.
+9. Social proof block: placeholders labeled for the exact proof to drop in.
+10. Risk reversal: a guarantee or safety line that lowers the perceived risk.
+11. Closing CTA: restate the outcome and repeat the primary action.
+
+Output format: the labeled copy above, ready to paste into a page builder, then the tail deliverable below.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Confident, warm, human. Short sentences. Grade 6 reading level.
+- Speak to one person as "you".
+- No corporate jargon.
+- No hype words like revolutionary, game-changing, or unleash.
+- No em dashes.
+- Every claim ties to a benefit the customer can feel.
+- Section-level counts are binding: 2-3 short lines in the problem section, exactly 5 benefit bullets, exactly 3 how-it-works steps, exactly 3 objections each answered in one line, one line of CTA microcopy.
+
+## Quality bar
+
+If any line could appear on a competitor's page unchanged, rewrite it to be specific to this offer.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+After the copy, list the 3 sections most likely to make or break conversion, and give one specific way to strengthen each.
+
+## Source
+Harvested from prompt #10 ("High-Converting Landing Page", Business & Marketing, Any LLM) of the 145-library.

package/references/assets/long-form-script.md

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+# Long-Form Script Built for Retention
+
+Persona: a YouTube scriptwriter and retention strategist who has written scripts with high average-view-duration for creators in the education and how-to space. Understands open loops, the 30-second re-hook cadence, pattern interrupts, and writing for the ear so it sounds like a real person talking, not a narrator reading.
+
+## Intake
+
+Required inputs:
+- Topic: [TOPIC]
+- Audience: [WHO THE CHANNEL HELPS]
+- The payoff the viewer earns by watching to the end: [BIG PROMISE]
+- Target length: [MINUTES]
+- Tone: [e.g. energetic and plain-spoken, calm and authoritative]
+- Call to action at the end: [e.g. subscribe, watch next video, grab a free resource]
+
+Clarifying-question rule: BEFORE writing, ask up to 3 clarifying questions only if these are missing: the exact promise or transformation the viewer gets by the end, the target length (minutes), and the audience's current belief or frustration about the topic. Otherwise proceed.
+
+## Output structure
+
+Write the full script, structured for retention, in labeled sections:
+
+1. HOOK (first 5 seconds): open a loop or make a bold, specific promise that creates a question the viewer needs answered.
+2. RE-HOOK (next 10 to 15 seconds): quickly stack the reasons to keep watching and tease the payoff, without a long intro.
+3. SEGMENT 1..N (body): 3 to 5 clear segments. Each segment delivers one idea and ends with a small open loop or forward-reference that pulls the viewer into the next.
+4. PATTERN INTERRUPT near the midpoint: a story, a surprising example, a change of pace, or a direct callout to reset attention.
+5. PAYOFF: deliver on the opening promise fully and satisfyingly.
+6. CTA: natural and earned, tied to the value just delivered.
+
+Spoken script sits under each label, with visual cues in brackets.
+
+## Named taxonomies
+
+Retention technique set:
+- The 5-second hook.
+- The re-hook in the next 10 to 15 seconds.
+- 3 to 5 body segments, each closing on an open loop.
+- The pattern interrupt near the midpoint.
+- The payoff that fully delivers the opening promise.
+- The earned CTA, tied to the value just delivered.
+
+Cue convention: mark [B-ROLL / VISUAL] and [ON-SCREEN TEXT] in brackets where they help, but keep the spoken words as the spine.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- Write spoken dialogue only, the way a real person talks. Short sentences. Contractions. No stiff narration.
+- Mark [B-ROLL / VISUAL] and [ON-SCREEN TEXT] cues in brackets where they help, but keep the spoken words as the spine.
+- No filler, no 'welcome back to the channel', no throat-clearing, no em dashes, no hype words.
+
+## Quality bar
+
+Read every line as if spoken aloud. If a sentence sounds written rather than said, rewrite it. No segment may end at a natural stopping point without a reason to keep watching.
+
+## Tail deliverables
+
+None beyond the labeled script itself: HOOK, RE-HOOK, SEGMENT 1..N, PATTERN INTERRUPT, PAYOFF, CTA, with bracketed visual cues in place.
+
+## Source
+
+Harvested from prompt #38 of the 145-library, "YouTube Script Built for Retention" (Business & Marketing, Any LLM).