Prompt Template Library

You are a copywriter testing video ad hooks for [offer type].

Write 5 different 15-second hooks for:
- Offer: [product name + mechanism]
- Audience: [age, situation, pain point]
- Tone: [confessional / aggressive / educational / skeptic-convert]

Each hook should:
- Use a different pattern (controversial, confessional, pattern-interrupt, skeptic-conversion, insider-knowledge)
- Include at least one specific detail (number, name, timeline)
- Create a curiosity gap (don't reveal the solution yet)
- Sound like a real person talking, not a script

Avoid: [list of cliches specific to your vertical]

You are a direct response copywriter specializing in UGC video ads for [vertical].

Write a 30-second script for:

Offer: [product + mechanism + price point if relevant]
Audience: [demographics + psychographics + awareness level]
Compliance: Cannot say [X, Y, Z]. Can say [A, B, C].

Format as:
- Hook (5-7s): [specific type of hook you want]
- Problem (10-12s): [specific pain points to hit]
- Solution (8-10s): [mechanism explanation, differentiation]
- Proof (5s): [type of proof: personal result, authority, etc]
- CTA (3-5s): [soft/hard, specific action]

Include these authenticity markers:
- Hesitation opening
- Self-deprecating moment
- Specific numbers (at least 3)
- One conversational aside
- Acknowledge what the audience already knows
- Casual grammar (contractions, gonna/wanna)

Avoid these AI tells:
- [cliches specific to your vertical]
- Perfect grammar
- Generic encouragement
- Hard CTA

You are a UGC scriptwriter creating a 60-second testimonial video for [vertical].

Write a first-person testimonial script for:

Offer: [product + mechanism]
Audience: [demographics + psychographics]
Compliance: Cannot say [X]. Can say [Y].

Structure:
- Cold open (3-5s): Mid-thought statement that hooks immediately
- Backstory (15s): Specific timeline of struggle (names, numbers, emotions)
- Rock bottom moment (10s): The specific moment they knew something had to change
- Discovery (10s): How they found the solution (doctor, friend, article)
- Experience (10s): What using it actually feels like day-to-day
- Result (7s): Specific outcome with honest framing
- CTA (5s): Soft recommendation, self-selecting language

Voice direction:
- Sounds like telling a friend over coffee, not presenting to camera
- Include at least 2 self-corrections or hesitations
- Use specific numbers for every claim
- Reference at least one thing the audience has tried and failed at
- End with qualifier ("this isn't for everyone")

Avoid:
- Opening with a question
- "Journey" or "transformation" language
- Listing features
- Medical claims
- Pushy CTA

The [section] needs work. It's [too generic / too polished / missing emotion / not specific enough / too long / too aggressive].

Rewrite only the [section] to:
- [specific improvement 1]
- [specific improvement 2]
- [specific improvement 3]

Keep everything else identical. Do not change the [hook/problem/solution/proof/CTA].

You are a health journalist writing an educational article for a mainstream health blog.

Write an 800-word listicle:

Title: "5 Signs Your [Problem] Isn't About [Common Misconception]"

Audience: [demographics, psychographic profile]
Tone: Empathetic, educational, not salesy
Product mention: Introduce [product] in sign #4, expand in conclusion

Structure each sign as:
- Subhead (specific, relatable situation)
- Explanation (2-3 sentences on the biological/psychological mechanism)
- Example scenario (one specific, detailed example)

Credibility elements:
- Cite at least one study or expert in signs #1 and #3
- Use specific numbers in every sign
- Explain mechanisms, don't just name problems

CTA:
- Soft recommendation in conclusion
- Self-selecting language ("if you've experienced 3 or more of these signs...")
- Link to [product] framed as "learn more," not "buy now"

Avoid:
- Mentioning the product before sign #4
- "Game-changing" or "revolutionary" language
- Hard CTA
- Cheerleading tone

You are a health writer conducting an expert interview for an online health publication.

Write a 1000-word Q&A article:

Title: "Why [Expert Type] Is Now Recommending [Solution Category] for [Problem]"

Format as interview:
- Intro paragraph (who the expert is, why this topic matters now, 2-3 sentences max)
- 5-7 Q&A pairs covering:
  * Why the traditional approach fails (biological/systemic reason)
  * What [solution category] does differently (mechanism)
  * Who it's appropriate for (qualification criteria)
  * Common misconceptions (address skepticism directly)
  * What realistic expectations look like (honest, not cheerleading)
  * How someone gets started (practical next steps)

- Conclusion: 2-3 sentences, soft mention of [product] as one telehealth option

Tone: Journalistic, credible, curious. The interviewer asks tough questions. The expert gives honest answers, including downsides.

Avoid:
- Product mention before the conclusion
- Promotional language from the "expert"
- Dodging the hard questions (cost, side effects, who it's NOT for)
- Generic praise

You are a freelance health writer sharing a personal experience for an online publication.

Write a 1200-word first-person article:

Title: [Confessional hook about the struggle, not the solution]

Structure:
- Opening (2 paragraphs): Specific timeline of struggle. Names of things tried. Emotional cost. No product mention.
- The breaking point (1 paragraph): The specific moment something had to change. Make it vivid and particular.
- Discovery (2 paragraphs): How they found out about [solution category]. Through a doctor, not an ad. Initial skepticism.
- Research (2 paragraphs): What they learned about the mechanism. Cite one study. Explain in plain language.
- The decision (1 paragraph): Why they decided to try it despite skepticism.
- Experience (2 paragraphs): What using it actually feels like day to day. Honest. Include a downside.
- Results (1 paragraph): Specific outcome. Understated, not hype.
- Conclusion (1 paragraph): Soft CTA. Mention [product].

Include:
- Specific numbers in every section (weights, timelines, costs)
- At least two self-deprecating moments
- Skepticism addressed honestly (not dismissed)
- One honest downside of the solution
- Conversational asides

Avoid:
- Perfect success story (too good to be true kills trust)
- Medical claims or guarantees
- "Miracle" / "game-changer" / "transformation"
- Product mention before the Discovery section
- Hard CTA

You are a direct response copywriter specializing in landing page headlines for [vertical].

Write 10 headlines for a landing page promoting [product/offer].

Audience: [demographics, psychographic, awareness level]
Compliance: Cannot say [X]. Can imply [Y].

Write 5 pain-driven headlines:
- Lead with a specific pain point the audience has experienced
- Include a number or timeline
- Imply a solution exists without naming it
- Reframe the problem (it's not their fault)

Write 5 curiosity-driven headlines:
- Challenge a common belief about [topic]
- Cite a statistic or study finding
- Create an information gap the reader needs to close
- Position the solution as new knowledge, not a product

Avoid:
- "Transform" / "game-changing" / "revolutionary"
- Questions as headlines ("Are you tired of...?")
- Unsubstantiated superlatives ("#1", "best", "most effective")
- Generic language that could apply to any product

You are a conversion copywriter writing benefit bullets for a [product type] landing page.

Write 8 benefit bullets for [product/offer].

Audience: [demographics, main pain points]
Compliance: Cannot claim [X]. Can describe [Y].

Each bullet should:
- Lead with the outcome, not the feature
- Include a specific detail (number, timeframe, mechanism)
- Be one sentence (two max)
- Sound like something a real user would say, not a marketing team

Format: [Outcome statement]. [Specific supporting detail.]

Avoid:
- Medical claims or guarantees
- Jargon without plain-language explanation
- Feature-first framing ("Our product uses...")
- Superlatives ("the most powerful", "best-in-class")

You are a conversion copywriter writing an FAQ section for a [product type] landing page.

Write 6 Q&A pairs that address the top objections for [product].

Audience: [demographics, likely concerns]

Top objections to address:
1. [Price/cost concern]
2. [Safety/side effects concern]
3. [Legitimacy/scam concern]
4. ["Is this really different?" concern]
5. [Process/logistics concern]
6. [Qualification concern]

For each Q&A:
- Question: Write it the way a skeptical reader would actually ask (casual, not formal)
- Answer: 2-4 sentences. Honest. Address the concern directly, don't dodge it. Include one specific detail that builds credibility. End with reassurance or next step.

Tone: Honest, direct, not defensive. If there's a real downside, acknowledge it.

Avoid:
- Dismissing concerns ("Don't worry about that!")
- Medical claims
- Corporate non-answers
- Overpromising

You are a performance marketer writing Facebook ad primary text for [vertical].

Write 5 primary text variations for:
- Offer: [product + mechanism]
- Audience: [demographics, psychographic, awareness level]
- Compliance: Cannot say [X]. Can say [Y].

Each variation should use a different angle:
1. Biology/mechanism reframe
2. Doctor/expert authority
3. Personal story (third person, specific details)
4. Statistic + reframe
5. Curiosity gap

Rules for each:
- First sentence must work as a standalone hook (truncation rule)
- Include at least one specific number
- 3-5 sentences total
- No questions as openers
- No AI cliches ("game-changing", "transform", "real results")
- Compliant: no guarantees, no medical claims

Tone: Informational, direct, slightly editorial. Not salesy.

You are a conversion copywriter writing Facebook ad headlines and descriptions for [vertical].

For each of these 5 primary text angles, write a headline and description:

[Paste your 5 primary text variations here]

Headlines:
- Under 10 words
- Either answer the curiosity gap OR deepen it
- No exclamation points
- No superlatives ("best", "#1", "most")

Descriptions:
- One sentence
- Either qualify the reader OR give a reason to click
- Specific, not generic
- No "click here" or "learn more" (these are the default and add nothing)

Tone: Match the primary text angle.

You are a media buyer generating creative variations for Facebook ads in [vertical].

I have a winning primary text angle: [paste your winner]

Write 8 variations of this angle. Same core message, different:
- Opening sentence (new hook each time)
- Specific details (different numbers, names, timelines)
- Framing (slightly different emotional angle)
- Length (mix of short 2-sentence and longer 4-sentence versions)

Keep the same:
- Core angle (biology reframe / doctor authority / etc)
- Compliance boundaries
- Tone
- Target audience

Each variation should feel fresh enough that the same person seeing them a week apart wouldn't immediately think "I've seen this before."

Avoid: Repeating the exact same statistic or phrase across variations.

I'm writing ad copy for a [product type] offer. My audience is [audience description].

Suggest 10 persuasion angles I could use that:
- Stay compliant (no [specific restrictions])
- Are emotionally compelling
- Differentiate from generic messaging
- Could work as video hooks, ad text, or advertorial openings

For each angle, give me:
1. The angle in one sentence
2. Why it works emotionally
3. Where the compliance line is (what to avoid)
4. An example opening sentence

Don't write full copy. Just give me the angles.

Write 3 versions of [this copy element] at different compliance levels:

Version 1 (Conservative): Clearly compliant. No grey area. Could run on any platform without review concerns. May be less compelling.

Version 2 (Moderate): Pushes slightly into grey area. Uses personal experience framing and mechanism language. Emotionally compelling but defensible if reviewed.

Version 3 (Aggressive): Pushes close to the line. Maximum emotional impact while staying technically compliant. Might get flagged by automated review but would pass manual review.

For each version, note:
- What makes it more/less aggressive
- Which specific words or phrases push the boundary
- What the compliance risk is (low/medium/high)

Here are my test results from Round [X]:

Winner: [paste winning creative]
Loser 1: [paste] - CTR: [X]%, CPA: $[X]
Loser 2: [paste] - CTR: [X]%, CPA: $[X]
Loser 3: [paste] - CTR: [X]%, CPA: $[X]

Analyze:
1. What specifically makes the winner different from the losers?
2. Which elements of the winner should I preserve in the next round?
3. What variable should I test next to improve it further?
4. Write 5 variations for the next test round, changing only [the variable you identified in #3].

I have this 30-second video script that's currently running:

[paste your current script]

The body, solution, proof, and CTA sections are performing well. I want to test new hooks only.

Write 10 alternative hooks (5-7 seconds each) for this script. Each hook should:
- Use a different approach (controversial, confessional, pattern-interrupt, skeptic-conversion, statistic-lead, insider-knowledge, fear-of-missing, social-proof, counter-intuitive, direct-challenge)
- Fit seamlessly with the existing body copy
- Create a curiosity gap that the problem section resolves

Keep the same tone and compliance level as the original.