Menu

Individual skill

campaign-challenger

0upvotes

Use this skill when a sequence is written but not yet launched, and someone needs to know whether it's actually good — benchmarked against the campaigns that team has already run rather than against generic best practice. Produces a ranked comparison against their own history, an absolute quality score with a launch threshold, and the three fixes worth making first. Trigger phrasings: "challenge this campaign", "is this sequence any good", "benchmark this against my best campaigns", "audit my copy", "pressure-test before launch", "should I launch this", "why is this campaign underperforming".

skills/erwann-lefevre/campaign-challenger/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 5d786aad0c7b2ca59b1abf1f601f9407ca261996

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 11, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
237
Repository last updated
Oct 20, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

Applies to a sequence that's written and not yet launched. Produces a comparison against the team's own campaign history, an absolute score, and a prioritised fix list.

## Judge against their history, not against best practice

Generic copywriting advice is the weakest available benchmark. It averages across every offer, market and level of competence, so it can tell you a draft is catastrophically broken and nothing finer than that.

The campaigns that team has already run are a far better instrument. They hold the offer constant, the market constant, and the sender's own credibility constant — so a difference between the draft and a past winner is a difference that means something. Run both reads and report both: comparative against their history, absolute against the quality bar. They fail differently, and a draft that passes one and fails the other is telling you something specific.

Where there's no history at all, don't error out. Fall back to the absolute bar, and say plainly that's what you're doing.

## Rank on meetings, not on replies

Reply rate is the number everyone has and the number that misleads most. A campaign can triple its replies by asking a question anyone can answer and book nothing.
Back to top