<!-- AUTO-GENERATED from SKILL.md.tmpl — do not edit directly --> <!-- Regenerate: bash bin/gen-skills -->

Preamble (run first)

_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 "$_RMBC_ROOT/bin/rmbc-analytics" log --skill "mechanism-ideation" --product "${_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.

mechanism-ideation

Purpose

Generate 5-7 novel mechanism angles for a product's core claim. A mechanism is the unique, specific explanation of WHY a product delivers its result — not "it works" but "because of [specific thing no competitor can claim]." This is Stefan Georgi's "Copy Thinking" — strategic ideation before a single word of copy is written. The mechanism is what separates winning copy from generic copy.

A strong mechanism is:

• Novel — the reader thinks "I've never heard of that before"
• Specific — names a compound, process, framework, or system
• Believable — grounded in real product attributes or research
• Ownable — passes the "only we" test (no competitor can claim it)

Inputs

Input	Required	Description
product_description	Yes	What the product is, what it does, key ingredients/features/components
product_category	Yes	One of: supplement, ecommerce, info_product
target_claim	No	The specific result or transformation the mechanism must explain
research_context	No	Prior research output (ingredient data, competitor analysis, ICP insights)

Execution Protocol

Step 1 — Load Framework Context

Read rmbc-context/resources/rmbc-methodology.md to load RMBC framework, including framework overview and quality dimensions. The mechanism phase requires a novel explanation that passes the "only we" test.

Step 2 — Extract Raw Material

From product_description and research_context, identify:

• Differentiators — What does this product have that competitors don't?
• Process uniqueness — How is it made, formulated, delivered, or structured differently?
• Proof anchors — What clinical data, patents, case studies, or results exist?
• Naming opportunities — What can be branded, coined, or reframed?

Step 3 — Branch by Category

Supplements

Focus on ingredient-based mechanisms:

• Unique compounds or proprietary blends
• Delivery systems (liposomal, time-release, nano-emulsion)
• Synergistic combinations ("X amplifies Y by Z%")
• Bioavailability advantages (absorption rates, clinical comparisons)
• Dosage differentiation (therapeutic dose vs competitor underdosing)
• Origin/sourcing story (high-altitude, wild-harvested, patented extraction)

E-commerce

Focus on product design and manufacturing mechanisms:

• Material innovation (proprietary fabric, alloy, compound)
• Manufacturing process (hand-finished, 47-step quality check, zero-waste)
• Structural engineering (patented hinge, load distribution, airflow system)
• Sourcing story (single-origin, direct-from-artisan, traceable supply chain)
• Design methodology (tested with 500 users, 3 years R&D, biomechanics lab)
• Performance metric (lasts 3x longer, 40% lighter, withstands 10,000 cycles)

Info Products

Focus on methodology and framework mechanisms:

• Proprietary framework (named system, unique sequencing, contrarian model)
• Elimination angle ("removes the one thing that blocks X")
• Speed/compression mechanism ("condenses 10 years into 90 days because...")
• Counter-intuitive principle ("works by doing the opposite of conventional advice")
• Stacking/layering system ("3 phases that compound — each unlocks the next")
• Credential transfer ("developed from [specific experience] that no course covers")

Step 4 — Generate Mechanism Ideas

For each of the 5-7 mechanisms, develop:

1. Mechanism name — A coined or branded term (e.g., "Tri-Phase Absorption Complex," "The Reverse Funnel Method")
2. One-line explanation — What it is in plain language
3. Why it works — The causal logic (2-3 sentences)
4. Proof anchor — What evidence supports this mechanism
5. Novelty score — 1-5 (1 = commonly claimed, 5 = never seen before)
6. Specificity rating — 1-5 (1 = vague, 5 = precise and concrete)
7. Believability check — HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW with one-line rationale

Step 5 — Rank and Recommend

Rank mechanisms by combined score (novelty + specificity). Flag any with LOW believability — these need additional research before use. Recommend the top 2-3 for copy development.

Output Format

## Mechanism Ideation: [Product Name]

**Category:** [supplement | ecommerce | info_product]
**Target claim:** [what the mechanism must explain]

---

### 1. [Mechanism Name]

**What it is:** [one-line explanation]

**Why it works:** [2-3 sentence causal logic]

**Proof anchor:** [supporting evidence]

| Novelty | Specificity | Believability |
|---------|-------------|---------------|
| X/5     | X/5         | HIGH/MED/LOW  |

[Repeat for each mechanism]

---

## Recommendation

**Top picks:** [ranked top 2-3 with brief rationale]

**Research gaps:** [any mechanisms that need deeper research before use]

**Next steps:** [which downstream skills to run]

Quality Criteria

• Every mechanism must name something specific — no "powerful formula" or "unique blend"

• At least 3 of 7 mechanisms should score 4+ on novelty

• Any mechanism scoring LOW on believability must include a research gap callout

• Mechanisms must be grounded in actual product attributes, not fabricated claims

• Output should give a copywriter enough material to write a mechanism reveal section

• Specificity gate: Every mechanism angle must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "unique approach" or "effective process"

• Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)

• Audience journey: Each mechanism 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: Each mechanism must survive skepticism — address "sounds too good to be true" with a grounding proof point and "how is this different?" with an explicit contrast to the conventional approach

Related Skills

• If research is thin, run /ingredient-research or /unified-research-synthesizer first
• After mechanism selected, use in /hook-battery for mechanism-driven hooks
• Feed chosen mechanism into /rmbc-copy-audit to validate mechanism scores

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:

• /hook-battery — generate mechanism-driven hooks
• /creative-brief — build a brief around the mechanism
• /advertorial-writer — write mechanism-led long-form

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.