taketomarket 2.3.0 → 2.3.1
This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
|
@@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
|
|
|
1
1
|
{
|
|
2
2
|
"name": "taketomarket",
|
|
3
|
-
"
|
|
4
|
-
"
|
|
5
|
-
"version": "2.3.0-rc.1",
|
|
3
|
+
"description": "Marketing OS for developerneurs + solopreneurs — engineers shipping products with zero marketing experience. Spec-driven campaigns with positioning-invariant quality gates.",
|
|
4
|
+
"version": "2.3.1",
|
|
6
5
|
"author": {
|
|
7
6
|
"name": "Rishikesh Ranjan",
|
|
8
7
|
"url": "https://github.com/ranjanrishikesh"
|
|
@@ -10,18 +9,15 @@
|
|
|
10
9
|
"homepage": "https://www.npmjs.com/package/taketomarket",
|
|
11
10
|
"repository": "https://github.com/ranjanrishikesh/taketomarket",
|
|
12
11
|
"license": "MIT",
|
|
13
|
-
"keywords": [
|
|
14
|
-
|
|
15
|
-
|
|
16
|
-
|
|
17
|
-
|
|
18
|
-
"
|
|
19
|
-
"
|
|
20
|
-
"
|
|
21
|
-
"
|
|
22
|
-
"
|
|
23
|
-
"ttm-competitor-scan", "ttm-aeo-check", "ttm-seo-audit",
|
|
24
|
-
"ttm-email-preflight", "ttm-keyword-map", "ttm-affiliate-kit",
|
|
25
|
-
"ttm-repurpose", "ttm-update"
|
|
12
|
+
"keywords": [
|
|
13
|
+
"marketing",
|
|
14
|
+
"campaigns",
|
|
15
|
+
"positioning",
|
|
16
|
+
"quality-gates",
|
|
17
|
+
"agent-skills",
|
|
18
|
+
"developerneurs",
|
|
19
|
+
"solopreneurs",
|
|
20
|
+
"gtm",
|
|
21
|
+
"indie-hackers"
|
|
26
22
|
]
|
|
27
23
|
}
|
|
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|
|
1
1
|
{
|
|
2
2
|
"name": "taketomarket",
|
|
3
|
-
"version": "2.3.
|
|
3
|
+
"version": "2.3.1",
|
|
4
4
|
"description": "Marketing OS for developerneurs and solopreneurs. Built for engineers shipping products with zero marketing experience required. Spec-driven campaigns with positioning-as-invariant enforcement and quality gate walls.",
|
|
5
5
|
"author": {
|
|
6
6
|
"name": "takeToMarket"
|
package/README.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
|
|
1
|
-
#
|
|
1
|
+
# taketomarket
|
|
2
2
|
|
|
3
3
|
[](https://www.npmjs.com/package/taketomarket)
|
|
4
4
|
[](https://github.com/ranjanrishikesh/taketomarket)
|
package/package.json
CHANGED
|
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|
|
1
1
|
{
|
|
2
2
|
"name": "taketomarket",
|
|
3
|
-
"version": "2.3.
|
|
3
|
+
"version": "2.3.1",
|
|
4
4
|
"description": "Marketing OS for developerneurs and solopreneurs. Built for engineers shipping products with zero marketing experience required. Spec-driven campaigns with positioning-as-invariant enforcement and quality gate walls.",
|
|
5
5
|
"license": "MIT",
|
|
6
6
|
"repository": {
|
|
@@ -254,6 +254,10 @@ Subhead: Built different. Powered by AI. Trusted by leaders.
|
|
|
254
254
|
|
|
255
255
|
Why it fails: differentiation claims with no named alternative ("only", "different"), invented category language, no ICP, no outcome. Differentiation arrives before clarity exists, which inverts the hierarchy. **Fails DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 and DISC-LANDING-PAGES-05.**
|
|
256
256
|
|
|
257
|
+
### Category-tagged H1 examples (clear vs clever)
|
|
258
|
+
|
|
259
|
+
For 20 trap-categorized headline pairs (SaaS buzzword / FinTech sophistication / DevTools jargon / UX engineering-speak) with gate-ID annotations and "why bad / why good" commentary, see the companion reference: `references/landing-page-headline-examples.md`. Used by `ttm-producer` for hero calibration and by `ttm-verify` for FAIL annotations on DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01 and DISC-POSITIONING-04.
|
|
260
|
+
|
|
257
261
|
---
|
|
258
262
|
|
|
259
263
|
## Anti-Patterns
|
|
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
|
|
|
25
25
|
- Lead with outcome, not feature. "Ship 3x more landing pages" beats "AI-powered landing page builder".
|
|
26
26
|
- Specific number > vague claim.
|
|
27
27
|
- Match the differentiator from POSITIONING.md.
|
|
28
|
+
- Examples (clear vs clever, category-tagged): see `references/landing-page-headline-examples.md`.
|
|
28
29
|
|
|
29
30
|
### CTAs
|
|
30
31
|
- Primary: action verb. "Start free trial", "Get demo", "Try it free".
|
|
@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
|
|
|
1
|
+
# Landing Page Headline Examples — Reference
|
|
2
|
+
|
|
3
|
+
Category-tagged headline pairs demonstrating the Clarity layer (DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01), Specificity over cleverness (DISC-POSITIONING-04, playbook §"Specificity Over Cleverness"), and the Plain-Language Floor rule.
|
|
4
|
+
|
|
5
|
+
Loaded by `/ttm-landing` alongside `playbooks/landing-pages.md` and `references/landing-page-anatomy.md`. Used by `ttm-producer` (production-time calibration of hero H1 / taglines) and `ttm-verify` (gate-evaluation reference for FAIL annotations).
|
|
6
|
+
|
|
7
|
+
**Pattern per entry:** trap → ❌ bad headline → ✅ good headline → why + gate IDs demonstrated.
|
|
8
|
+
|
|
9
|
+
---
|
|
10
|
+
|
|
11
|
+
## 1. SaaS & B2B Platforms — The "Enterprise Buzzword" Trap
|
|
12
|
+
|
|
13
|
+
Trap signature: stacking abstract nouns ("paradigms", "synthesis", "velocity") in place of naming the actual workflow.
|
|
14
|
+
|
|
15
|
+
### Analytics Tool
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
- ❌ "Unlock actionable data paradigms with unified predictive intelligence."
|
|
18
|
+
- ✅ "See exactly where your website visitors click, scroll, and get stuck."
|
|
19
|
+
- **Why bad:** invented category language ("paradigms", "predictive intelligence") with no plain-language floor; visitor cannot name the category. **Why good:** names the literal observed actions (click / scroll / get stuck) the ICP recognizes from their own work.
|
|
20
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01 (clarity), DISC-POSITIONING-04 (specificity), banned-phrase compliance.
|
|
21
|
+
|
|
22
|
+
### CRM / Sales Tool
|
|
23
|
+
|
|
24
|
+
- ❌ "Accelerate pipeline velocity via hyper-personalized touchpoint synthesis."
|
|
25
|
+
- ✅ "Track your sales deals and get reminders to follow up with leads before they go cold."
|
|
26
|
+
- **Why bad:** "pipeline velocity" and "touchpoint synthesis" are seller-internal vocabulary the champion (an AE) does not use about their own day. **Why good:** names the literal jobs (track deals, follow-up reminders, leads going cold) in champion vocabulary.
|
|
27
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-02 (audience-vocabulary check), DISC-POSITIONING-04.
|
|
28
|
+
|
|
29
|
+
### Customer Support Software
|
|
30
|
+
|
|
31
|
+
- ❌ "Orchestrate multi-channel customer success flywheels at scale."
|
|
32
|
+
- ✅ "Manage all your customer emails, chats, and tweets in one shared inbox."
|
|
33
|
+
- **Why bad:** "orchestrate" + "flywheels" + "at scale" stacks 3 banned phrases; no named channel, no named workflow. **Why good:** names the channels explicitly (emails / chats / tweets) and the mechanism (one shared inbox).
|
|
34
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (outcome framing), banned-phrase compliance.
|
|
35
|
+
|
|
36
|
+
### AI Writing Assistant
|
|
37
|
+
|
|
38
|
+
- ❌ "Leverage generative semantic frameworks to amplify content velocity."
|
|
39
|
+
- ✅ "Write high-converting landing pages and ad copy in seconds, not hours."
|
|
40
|
+
- **Why bad:** "leverage" + "generative semantic frameworks" + "content velocity" is internal-to-AI-team vocabulary; no named output type. **Why good:** names the output (landing pages, ad copy) and the contrast (seconds vs hours) the buyer measures themselves on.
|
|
41
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (numeric specificity), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 (named alternative = manual writing).
|
|
42
|
+
|
|
43
|
+
### Collaboration Hub
|
|
44
|
+
|
|
45
|
+
- ❌ "The single source of truth for cross-functional alignment and asynchronous operational velocity."
|
|
46
|
+
- ✅ "One central place for your team to share notes, assign tasks, and track project deadlines."
|
|
47
|
+
- **Why bad:** "single source of truth" + "cross-functional alignment" + "operational velocity" = three abstract phrases stacked in one sentence; visitor cannot name what verbs they perform with the tool. **Why good:** names the three verbs (share notes, assign tasks, track deadlines) directly.
|
|
48
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-POSITIONING-04, anti-pattern #10 (stuffing all four layers).
|
|
49
|
+
|
|
50
|
+
---
|
|
51
|
+
|
|
52
|
+
## 2. FinTech & Crypto — The "We Sound Sophisticated" Trap
|
|
53
|
+
|
|
54
|
+
Trap signature: dressing money workflows in latinate / actuarial vocabulary to signal seriousness; loses the founder/finance-team buyer who just wants their books closed.
|
|
55
|
+
|
|
56
|
+
### Accounting Software
|
|
57
|
+
|
|
58
|
+
- ❌ "Streamline fiscal reconciliation and end-to-end ledger mitigation."
|
|
59
|
+
- ✅ "Track your business expenses and send professional invoices that get paid on time."
|
|
60
|
+
- **Why bad:** "fiscal reconciliation" + "ledger mitigation" reads like a CFO compliance memo; SMB owner audience does not use those words. **Why good:** named verbs (track expenses, send invoices) and a named pain (getting paid on time).
|
|
61
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-02 (champion vocabulary check), DISC-POSITIONING-03 (champion vs buyer).
|
|
62
|
+
|
|
63
|
+
### Expense Management App
|
|
64
|
+
|
|
65
|
+
- ❌ "De-risk corporate spend architectures with automated compliance rails."
|
|
66
|
+
- ✅ "Give employees company cards with built-in spending limits so no one blows the budget."
|
|
67
|
+
- **Why bad:** "spend architectures" + "compliance rails" is CFO/audit-firm vocabulary; the practitioner buyer (ops/finance lead) does not describe their problem that way. **Why good:** names the artifact (company cards), the mechanism (built-in limits), and the named-alternative pain (someone blowing the budget).
|
|
68
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 (named alternative = the rogue spender), DISC-POSITIONING-03.
|
|
69
|
+
|
|
70
|
+
### Personal Finance Tracker
|
|
71
|
+
|
|
72
|
+
- ❌ "Optimize your holistic capital deployment and micro-budgetary allocations."
|
|
73
|
+
- ✅ "See exactly how much money you have left to spend this month after paying bills."
|
|
74
|
+
- **Why bad:** "capital deployment" is wealth-manager language; consumer audience reads it as "not for me." **Why good:** names the exact moment of decision the user has every month (money left after bills).
|
|
75
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-02 (audience-vocabulary), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (concrete after-state).
|
|
76
|
+
|
|
77
|
+
### Crypto / Web3 Wallet
|
|
78
|
+
|
|
79
|
+
- ❌ "A decentralized non-custodial gateway to cross-chain liquidity aggregation."
|
|
80
|
+
- ✅ "A secure app to store, send, and trade your digital currency without a middleman."
|
|
81
|
+
- **Why bad:** "non-custodial gateway" + "cross-chain liquidity aggregation" is protocol-team vocabulary; the retail wallet buyer does not yet know what those words mean. **Why good:** names the verbs (store / send / trade) and the named alternative (without a middleman) in 12-year-old language.
|
|
82
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01 (plain-language floor), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 (named alternative = "middleman" = exchanges/banks).
|
|
83
|
+
|
|
84
|
+
### Payment Processor
|
|
85
|
+
|
|
86
|
+
- ❌ "Frictionless global monetary infrastructure powering the internet economy."
|
|
87
|
+
- ✅ "Accept credit card payments from customers anywhere in the world with a few lines of code."
|
|
88
|
+
- **Why bad:** "global monetary infrastructure" + "internet economy" is press-release talk; the developer integrator buyer needs to know what the SDK does. **Why good:** names the action (accept credit card payments), the scope (anywhere in the world), and the integration cost (a few lines of code).
|
|
89
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-02 (developer audience), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (specific cost).
|
|
90
|
+
|
|
91
|
+
---
|
|
92
|
+
|
|
93
|
+
## 3. DevTools & Cloud Infrastructure — The "Heavy Jargon" Trap
|
|
94
|
+
|
|
95
|
+
Trap signature: stacking distributed-systems vocabulary ("topology", "fabrics", "telemetry matrices") as a substitute for naming the developer pain.
|
|
96
|
+
|
|
97
|
+
### Cloud Hosting Platform
|
|
98
|
+
|
|
99
|
+
- ❌ "Automated containerization topology with edge-optimized elasticity."
|
|
100
|
+
- ✅ "Deploy your code to the web instantly without worrying about configuring servers."
|
|
101
|
+
- **Why bad:** "containerization topology" + "edge-optimized elasticity" is ops-team vocabulary; the application developer buyer wants to forget servers exist. **Why good:** names the action (deploy code), the speed (instantly), and the named-alternative pain (configuring servers).
|
|
102
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 (named alternative = traditional ops), DISC-POSITIONING-03 (champion = app developer, not SRE).
|
|
103
|
+
|
|
104
|
+
### Database Service
|
|
105
|
+
|
|
106
|
+
- ❌ "Highly available, horizontally scalable distributed relational data fabrics."
|
|
107
|
+
- ✅ "A database that automatically grows with your app so it never crashes during a traffic spike."
|
|
108
|
+
- **Why bad:** "horizontally scalable distributed relational data fabrics" is four abstract modifiers; the buyer cannot say which problem this solves. **Why good:** names the failure mode (crash during traffic spike) and the mechanism (automatic growth).
|
|
109
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (concrete failure-mode contrast), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 (named alternative = manual scaling).
|
|
110
|
+
|
|
111
|
+
### APM / Monitoring Tool
|
|
112
|
+
|
|
113
|
+
- ❌ "End-to-end telemetry and observability matrices for distributed microservices."
|
|
114
|
+
- ✅ "Get alerted the exact second your website goes down or a bug breaks the checkout page."
|
|
115
|
+
- **Why bad:** "telemetry" + "observability matrices" is monitoring-vendor vocabulary; the engineering manager buyer wants to know what they will be paged for. **Why good:** names the trigger (website down / checkout broken) and the named-alternative pain (finding out from a customer).
|
|
116
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-02 (named scenarios), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (concrete outcome).
|
|
117
|
+
|
|
118
|
+
### API Gateway
|
|
119
|
+
|
|
120
|
+
- ❌ "Unify ingress governance and request routing across heterogeneous endpoints."
|
|
121
|
+
- ✅ "A single, secure front door for all your external software tools to talk to your app."
|
|
122
|
+
- **Why bad:** "ingress governance" + "heterogeneous endpoints" is networking-team vocabulary; the application developer audience needs the metaphor. **Why good:** uses the "front door" metaphor (concrete enough to picture) and names the actors (external tools talking to your app).
|
|
123
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01 (plain-language floor — metaphor permitted because it lands instantly), DISC-POSITIONING-04.
|
|
124
|
+
|
|
125
|
+
### No-Code App Builder
|
|
126
|
+
|
|
127
|
+
- ❌ "Democratizing application development through visual programmatic synthesis."
|
|
128
|
+
- ✅ "Build custom mobile apps using a drag-and-drop editor—no coding skills required."
|
|
129
|
+
- **Why bad:** "democratizing" + "visual programmatic synthesis" is investor-deck vocabulary; the non-developer audience reads it as "not for me." **Why good:** names the output (mobile apps), the mechanism (drag-and-drop editor), and the prerequisite (no coding skills).
|
|
130
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-02 (explicit ICP opt-in: non-coders), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 (named alternative = traditional coding).
|
|
131
|
+
|
|
132
|
+
---
|
|
133
|
+
|
|
134
|
+
## 4. UX Microcopy & Product UI — The "Engineering Speaks First" Trap
|
|
135
|
+
|
|
136
|
+
Trap signature: surfacing internal error/system vocabulary into end-user-facing strings. Same Clarity-first rule applies to microcopy as to hero H1s — the user reads a string at a moment of friction and must understand it instantly.
|
|
137
|
+
|
|
138
|
+
### File Upload Failure
|
|
139
|
+
|
|
140
|
+
- ❌ "Fatal Exception: Payload exceeds maximum multi-part form allocation threshold."
|
|
141
|
+
- ✅ "This file is too big. Please upload an image smaller than 5MB."
|
|
142
|
+
- **Why bad:** "Fatal Exception" + "multi-part form allocation threshold" is the stack trace bleeding into the UI. **Why good:** names the problem (file too big) and the fix (image smaller than 5MB) in one breath.
|
|
143
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01 (clarity), DISC-POSITIONING-04, anti-pattern #1 (clever-over-clear extended to microcopy).
|
|
144
|
+
|
|
145
|
+
### Account Creation Success
|
|
146
|
+
|
|
147
|
+
- ❌ "Profile provisioning completed. Session tokens have been successfully initialized."
|
|
148
|
+
- ✅ "Your account is ready! Let's set up your profile."
|
|
149
|
+
- **Why bad:** "profile provisioning" + "session tokens" is server-log vocabulary; user has no model for what just happened. **Why good:** confirms the state ("your account is ready") and previews the next action.
|
|
150
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (named next action = outcome).
|
|
151
|
+
|
|
152
|
+
### Session Timeout Notice
|
|
153
|
+
|
|
154
|
+
- ❌ "Security protocol enforcement: Authentication window has elapsed due to zero user interaction inputs."
|
|
155
|
+
- ✅ "You've been logged out due to inactivity to keep your account safe."
|
|
156
|
+
- **Why bad:** "authentication window has elapsed due to zero user interaction inputs" is the security log narrating itself; user only needs to know what happened and why. **Why good:** states the state (logged out), the cause (inactivity), and the why (account safety) in one sentence.
|
|
157
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03.
|
|
158
|
+
|
|
159
|
+
### Pricing Plan Limit
|
|
160
|
+
|
|
161
|
+
- ❌ "Usage parameters have reached tier capacity. Please upgrade to lift throughput constraints."
|
|
162
|
+
- ✅ "You've used all 5 free projects this month. Upgrade to Pro to create unlimited projects."
|
|
163
|
+
- **Why bad:** "usage parameters" + "tier capacity" + "throughput constraints" hides the actual limit and the actual benefit of upgrading. **Why good:** names the limit ("5 free projects this month") and the unlock ("unlimited projects").
|
|
164
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-03 (named after-state), DISC-LANDING-PAGES-04 (named contrast = free vs Pro).
|
|
165
|
+
|
|
166
|
+
### Search Field Placeholder
|
|
167
|
+
|
|
168
|
+
- ❌ "Execute dynamic query generation against database parameters..."
|
|
169
|
+
- ✅ "Search for orders, invoices, or customer names..."
|
|
170
|
+
- **Why bad:** "execute dynamic query generation" is engineering's description of what the input field does; the user wants to know what they can search. **Why good:** names the searchable entities (orders / invoices / customer names) so the user knows what kinds of queries land hits.
|
|
171
|
+
- **Gates demonstrated:** DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01, DISC-LANDING-PAGES-02 (named entities = audience-recognizable).
|
|
172
|
+
|
|
173
|
+
---
|
|
174
|
+
|
|
175
|
+
## How to use these examples
|
|
176
|
+
|
|
177
|
+
- **At production time** (`ttm-producer`): when generating a hero H1, compare candidate output to the matched trap-category bad example. If candidate stacks ≥2 abstract nouns from the trap signature, regenerate using the good example's concrete-verb pattern as a calibration anchor.
|
|
178
|
+
- **At verification time** (`ttm-verify`): when annotating a FAIL on DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01 or DISC-POSITIONING-04, cite the closest trap category here and quote the good-side rewrite as the recommendation.
|
|
179
|
+
- **At humanize time** (`/ttm-humanize`): if hero copy survives the gates but still reads like a buzzword stack, run it past the trap-category good example as a tone calibration.
|
|
180
|
+
|
|
181
|
+
## Cross-references
|
|
182
|
+
|
|
183
|
+
- Discipline gates evaluated: `playbooks/landing-pages.md` § Discipline Gates (DISC-LANDING-PAGES-01..06).
|
|
184
|
+
- Positioning gate cross-applied: `playbooks/positioning.md` DISC-POSITIONING-04 (Specificity Over Cleverness).
|
|
185
|
+
- Banned phrases: `workflows/setup/init-validation.md` § Banned Phrases (Global).
|
|
186
|
+
- Operational hero structure: `references/landing-page-anatomy.md` § Hero headline rules.
|
|
187
|
+
|
|
188
|
+
## Sources
|
|
189
|
+
|
|
190
|
+
Examples curated from common SaaS / FinTech / DevTools / UX-microcopy buzzword-trap patterns. Categories adapted from the four traps identified in user-provided source material (May 2026).
|