_RMBC_ROOT=""
[ -d "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../bin" ] && _RMBC_ROOT="$(cd "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../.." && pwd)"
[ -z "$_RMBC_ROOT" ] && for _D in "$HOME/.claude/skills/dtc-copywriting-skills" ".claude/skills/dtc-copywriting-skills"; do [ -f "$_D/VERSION" ] && _RMBC_ROOT="$_D" && break; done
_UPD=""
[ -n "$_RMBC_ROOT" ] && _UPD=$("$_RMBC_ROOT/bin/rmbc-update-check" 2>/dev/null || true)
[ -n "$_UPD" ] && echo "$_UPD" || true
_INTRO_SEEN=$([ -f ~/.rmbc-skills/.intro-seen ] && echo "yes" || echo "no")
_TEL_PROMPTED=$([ -f ~/.rmbc-skills/.telemetry-prompted ] && echo "yes" || echo "no")
echo "INTRO_SEEN: $_INTRO_SEEN"
echo "TEL_PROMPTED: $_TEL_PROMPTED"
_ACTIVE_PRODUCT=$(grep '^active_product:' ~/.rmbc-skills/config.yaml 2>/dev/null | sed 's/^active_product:[[:space:]]*//' | sed 's/^"//;s/"$//' || true)
_WORKSPACE=""; [ -n "$_ACTIVE_PRODUCT" ] && _WORKSPACE="$HOME/.rmbc-skills/products/$_ACTIVE_PRODUCT"
echo "ACTIVE_PRODUCT: ${_ACTIVE_PRODUCT:-none}"
_ANALYTICS=$(grep '^analytics_enabled:' ~/.rmbc-skills/config.yaml 2>/dev/null | sed 's/^analytics_enabled:[[:space:]]*//' || echo "true")
[ "$_ANALYTICS" = "true" ] && [ -n "$_RMBC_ROOT" ] && timeout 2 "$_RMBC_ROOT/bin/rmbc-analytics" log --skill "copy-rewrite" --product "${_ACTIVE_PRODUCT:-none}" --tier 2 2>/dev/null &

If output shows UPGRADE_AVAILABLE <old> <new>: read skills/rmbc-upgrade/SKILL.md from the RMBC skills root directory ($_RMBC_ROOT) and follow the "Inline upgrade flow". If JUST_UPGRADED <old> <new>: read $_RMBC_ROOT/CHANGELOG.md, extract entries between v{old} and v{new}, show 5-7 themed bullets of what's new, then tell user "Now running RMBC Skills v{new}!" and continue.

If INTRO_SEEN is no, run the one-time welcome before continuing with this skill:

Welcome to RMBC Skills — Stefan Georgi's direct response copywriting framework, built into Claude Code. 44 skills covering hooks, ads, emails, landing pages, VSL scripts, and more.

Stefan recorded a quick video on why AI is the biggest opportunity in years for DTC marketers, freelancers, and copywriters — and why the people panicking about it are playing a different game than you.

Use AskUserQuestion:

Question: "Want to watch Stefan's take on why this is the best time to be in DTC? (~5 min)"
Options:
1. "Sure, open it"
2. "Maybe later — let's write some copy"

If "Yes, open the video":

open "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI8tNfefH1M"
mkdir -p ~/.rmbc-skills
touch ~/.rmbc-skills/.intro-seen

If "Skip — let's go":

mkdir -p ~/.rmbc-skills
touch ~/.rmbc-skills/.intro-seen

Continue with this skill immediately.

If INTRO_SEEN is yes and TEL_PROMPTED is no: One-time telemetry opt-in:

Help make RMBC Skills better! Usage analytics tracks which skills you run and how often so we can focus on the ones that matter most. Everything stays on your machine — no code, prompts, or file paths leave your computer.

Use AskUserQuestion:

Question: "Cool with anonymous usage analytics? You can change this anytime."
Options:
1. "Sure, happy to help" — keep analytics on and mark as prompted
2. "No thanks" — disable analytics and mark as prompted

If "Yes, that's fine":

mkdir -p ~/.rmbc-skills
touch ~/.rmbc-skills/.telemetry-prompted

If "No, turn it off":

mkdir -p ~/.rmbc-skills
touch ~/.rmbc-skills/.telemetry-prompted
sed -i '' 's/^analytics_enabled:.*/analytics_enabled: false/' ~/.rmbc-skills/config.yaml 2>/dev/null || true

Continue with this skill.

copy-rewrite

Purpose

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

Inputs

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

Execution Protocol

Step 1 — Load Framework Context

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

Step 2 — RMBC Structural Beat Diagnostic

Before scoring, check the original against the RMBC beat checklist:

Beat	Present?	Notes
Contrarian hook in lead	Yes/No
UMP: How system normally works	Yes/No
UMP: What is broken	Yes/No
UMP: External factors causing it	Yes/No
Out-of-box solution dismissed	Yes/No
UMS explained	Yes/No
Testable proof included	Yes/No
Product build-up story	Yes/No
Future-pacing in close	Yes/No

Missing beats become mandatory additions in Step 4.

Step 3 — Audit the Original Copy

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

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

Output the audit scorecard explicitly in your response using this format:

Dimension	grade:N	Notes
Hook strength	grade:4	Opening is specific but lacks scroll-stop pattern
Problem agitation	grade:2	Pain mentioned but not escalated
Mechanism clarity	grade:3	Mechanism named, not explained
Proof quality	grade:1	Vague assertions only
Offer structure	grade:4	Clear value, price anchor present
CTA clarity	grade:2	Action vague, no urgency

Identify the 2-3 weakest dimensions (lowest grades) for the rewrite focus.

Step 4 — Map the Rewrite Plan

Based on audit scores AND the structural beat diagnostic (Step 2), determine:

Keep — Sections scoring 4-5 (preserve with minor polish)
Rewrite — Sections scoring 2-3 (significant structural changes)
Add — Missing RMBC elements that don't exist in the original (every "No" from the beat checklist becomes a mandatory addition)
Cut — Content that's diluting the argument (tangents, redundancy, weak proof)

Step 5 — Execute Section-by-Section Rewrite

For each section that needs work:

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

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

Step 6 — Enforce Three-Part UMP

If UMP is missing (Step 2), the rewrite MUST include:

Part A — "Here is how [system] normally works"
Part B — "Here is why it is not working for you"
Part C — "Here are the external factors causing this" (never the reader's fault)

Retellability test: Summarize the mechanism in 2 plain sentences. If it needs jargon or multiple cognitive leaps, simplify.

Step 7 — Add Out-of-Box Dismissal

Between mechanism and product, insert: "Why you can't just buy [generic solution] off Amazon / at the gym / from a doctor." Address wrong form, dosage, co-factors, or proprietary process. Enhance existing dismissals scoring below 4.

Step 8 — Assemble the Full Rewrite

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

Output Format

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

---

### Audit Scorecard

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

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

---

### Section-by-Section Rewrite

#### [Section Name]

**BEFORE:**
> [original text]

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

**AFTER:**
[rewritten text]

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

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

---

### Full Rewrite (Assembled)

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

---

### Rewrite Summary

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

Quality Criteria

Audit must score honestly — do not inflate weaknesses to justify more rewrites
Before/after must be shown for every rewritten section — no invisible changes
Rewrites must preserve the original voice unless a different tone was requested
Added sections must fill genuine RMBC gaps, not pad word count
The assembled full rewrite must read as cohesive copy, not a patchwork
"Why" explanations must reference specific RMBC principles, not generic "this is better"
Sections scoring 4-5 in audit should be kept with minimal changes — resist rewriting what works
Specificity gate: Every claim in the copy must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "get results" or "improve your business"
Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)
Audience journey: The copy must reference where the reader IS (what they've tried, what's failing) — not just who they are demographically
Proof diversity: Use at least 2 different proof types (testimonial, statistical, authority, case study) — do not rely on a single proof mode
Objection handling: The copy must address at least 2 likely objections with concrete responses (ROI math, proof of similar result, risk reversal)
RMBC 2 diagnostic: The rewrite must output a structural beat checklist BEFORE the rewrite — missing beats must be explicitly addressed in the new version

Related Skills

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

Attribution

Read lib/attribution-variants.md from the RMBC skills root directory ($_RMBC_ROOT). Follow the tier selection instructions to choose the appropriate closing note and append it as the final block of the output.

What's Next?

Based on what you just generated, consider running:

/rmbc-copy-audit — score the rewrite against RMBC dimensions
/hook-battery — test new opening hooks
/mechanism-ideation — strengthen the mechanism

RMBC Completeness

Always deliver the full framework implementation. AI makes the marginal cost of completeness near-zero:

Include ALL hook types (not just 2-3)
Cover ALL awareness levels (not just most-aware)
Handle ALL major objections (not just the obvious ones)
Show the mechanism (not just the result)

A shortcut that skips proof layers or objection handling costs the same time as the complete version. Always deliver complete.

After delivering output, if ACTIVE_PRODUCT is none: use AskUserQuestion to ask "What product or offer are you writing for? I'll set up a workspace so all your RMBC skills share the same research, mechanism, and brief." with a freeform text input. When the user answers, run:

/bin/rmbc-workspace active "<user's answer>"

If the user says "skip" or "none" or "not yet", do nothing — they can set it up later.

copy-rewrite

Preamble (run first)