/content:good

Create high-quality, strategic copy with comprehensive research, competitor analysis, and multiple alternatives with detailed rationale. This is your go-to command for important content that requires thoughtful strategy and optimization.

Syntax

/content:good [content request]

How It Works

The /content:good command follows a comprehensive content creation workflow:

1. Deep Research Phase

Invokes copywriter agent with researcher support:

Analyzes target audience deeply
Studies competitor content
Reviews successful examples
Identifies content gaps
Researches psychological triggers
Examines platform best practices

2. Strategic Planning

Defines clear content objectives
Identifies key messages
Plans content structure
Selects appropriate tone
Maps user journey alignment

3. Multi-Variant Creation

Creates multiple high-quality variations:

3-5 complete versions
Different angles/approaches
Various hooks and structures
Platform-optimized formatting

4. Detailed Rationale

For each variation provides:

Strategic reasoning
Target audience fit
Psychological triggers used
Expected effectiveness
When to use each version

5. A/B Testing Recommendations

Suggests testing strategy:

Which variations to test
What metrics to track
Test duration recommendations
Expected performance ranges

Examples

Strategic Blog Post

/content:good [write blog post about AI code review benefits for engineering teams]

What happens:

Agent: copywriter + researcher
Type: Strategic blog post
Goal: Drive organic traffic + signups

Phase 1: Research (45 seconds)
---
Analyzing:
- Top 10 ranking articles for "AI code review"
- Competitor content (GitHub Copilot, Tabnine, etc.)
- Engineering blogs (Google, Meta, Netflix)
- Reddit discussions (r/programming, r/devops)

Key findings:
✓ Most content focuses on features, not outcomes
✓ Gap: Real metrics from production use
✓ Developers skeptical of AI quality claims
✓ Need: Specific integration examples
✓ Pain: Time wasted in manual reviews

Opportunity:
- Lead with real data (70% time savings)
- Include actual team testimonials
- Show integration in 10 minutes
- Address skepticism directly

Phase 2: Outline Created
---
1. Hook: Engineering manager pain point
2. The real cost of manual code review (with data)
3. How AI code review actually works
4. Real results: 3 team case studies
5. Common objections answered
6. Implementation guide
7. ROI calculator
8. Next steps + CTA

Word count target: 2,000 words
Reading time: 8 minutes
SEO keywords: "AI code review", "automated code review",
"code review tools"

Phase 3: Multiple Variations Generated
---

VARIATION 1: Data-Driven Approach
Title: "How 3 Engineering Teams Cut Code Review Time by 70%"

Opening:
"Last Tuesday, Sarah's team spent 6 hours in code review.
They found 3 bugs. Today, AI found 47 bugs in 12 minutes.

Here's what changed..."

Rationale:
+ Starts with specific, relatable scenario
+ Shows concrete before/after
+ Promises specific learnings
+ Best for: Engineering managers, data-driven buyers

Expected performance: High CTR from search, good conversions


VARIATION 2: Story-Driven Approach
Title: "We Let AI Review Our Code for 6 Months. Here's What Happened"

Opening:
"Six months ago, I was skeptical. 'AI can't understand
our codebase,' I told my CTO. I was wrong.

Today, our team ships 2x faster, and code quality is
measurably better. Here's the full story..."

Rationale:
+ Addresses skepticism head-on
+ First-person builds credibility
+ Narrative arc keeps readers engaged
+ Best for: Social shares, developer audience

Expected performance: High engagement, strong retention


VARIATION 3: Problem-Solution Approach
Title: "Your Code Review Process Is Broken. Here's How to Fix It"

Opening:
"Code reviews are the bottleneck nobody talks about.

PRs sit for days. Reviewers get fatigued. Critical bugs
slip through. Sound familiar?

There's a better way..."

Rationale:
+ Identifies universal pain point
+ Creates urgency
+ Promises clear solution
+ Best for: Paid ads, landing page

Expected performance: High conversion rate


Phase 4: Full Content Delivered
---
Selected: Variation 1 (Data-Driven)
Full 2,000-word article created with:

✓ Compelling headline (includes number + benefit)
✓ Strong hook (specific scenario)
✓ 3 real case studies with metrics
✓ 8 subheadings (H2) with SEO keywords
✓ Data visualizations suggested (3 charts)
✓ 5 code examples
✓ Common objections section
✓ Implementation guide
✓ Clear CTA with free trial offer
✓ Meta description (158 chars)
✓ Internal links (5) + external (2)
✓ Image suggestions (7 with alt text)

SEO optimization:
- Primary keyword in title, H1, first paragraph
- Secondary keywords in H2s
- Keyword density: 1.4% (optimal)
- Readability: Flesch score 62 (easy)

Phase 5: A/B Testing Strategy
---
Test 1: Headlines
A: "How 3 Engineering Teams Cut Code Review Time by 70%"
B: "Cut Code Review Time by 70%: Real Results from 3 Teams"
C: "The Code Review Method That Saved 20 Hours/Week"
Metric: CTR from search/social
Duration: 2 weeks

Test 2: CTAs
A: "Start Free Trial"
B: "See How It Works"
C: "Get 70% Faster Reviews"
Metric: Signup rate
Duration: 1 week

Expected overall performance:
- Organic traffic: Top 5 ranking within 3 months
- Avg. time on page: 4-5 minutes
- Signup conversion: 8-12%

✓ Content complete (2 minutes 30 seconds)

Files created:
- content/blog/ai-code-review-benefits-v1-data.md
- content/blog/ai-code-review-benefits-v2-story.md
- content/blog/ai-code-review-benefits-v3-problem.md
- content/blog/ai-code-review-research.md
- content/blog/ai-code-review-ab-tests.md

Landing Page Copy

/content:good [write landing page copy for ClaudeKit Pro targeting enterprise teams]

What happens:

Agent: copywriter + researcher
Type: Landing page (conversion-critical)
Audience: Enterprise engineering teams

Phase 1: Research (60 seconds)
---
Competitor analysis:
- GitHub Copilot Enterprise
- Tabnine Enterprise
- AWS CodeWhisperer
- Replit Teams

Key findings:
✓ All emphasize security (enterprise concern)
✓ ROI focus (cost per developer matters)
✓ Integration ease (IT approval process)
✓ Scale (1000+ developer support)

Enterprise buyer concerns:
1. Security & compliance
2. ROI justification
3. Implementation time
4. Support & SLA
5. Migration path

Phase 2: Landing Page Strategy
---
Structure:
1. Above fold: Clear value prop + social proof
2. Social proof: Logo bar (recognizable companies)
3. Benefits: Focus on business outcomes
4. Features: Presented as business benefits
5. Security: Dedicated section
6. Case study: Enterprise success story
7. ROI calculator: Interactive
8. Pricing: Transparent with comparison
9. FAQ: Address objections
10. CTA: Multiple throughout

Phase 3: Variations Created
---

APPROACH 1: ROI-Focused

Hero Section:
---
Headline: "Cut Development Costs by 40% With AI"
Subheadline: "Enterprise-grade AI development platform
trusted by teams at Google, Meta, and Amazon."

CTA: "Calculate Your ROI" (primary)
CTA: "Book Demo" (secondary)

Social proof: "Trusted by 500+ enterprise teams"
---

Rationale:
+ Leads with CFO concern (cost reduction)
+ Specific number (40%)
+ Enterprise social proof prominent
+ ROI calculator as primary CTA (engagement)
+ Best for: Economic buyer (VPs, C-suite)


APPROACH 2: Security-First

Hero Section:
---
Headline: "Enterprise-Grade AI Development Platform"
Subheadline: "SOC 2 Type II certified. GDPR compliant.
Your code never trains our models."

CTA: "Security Whitepaper" (primary)
CTA: "Book Demo" (secondary)

Trust badges: SOC 2, GDPR, ISO 27001
---

Rationale:
+ Addresses #1 enterprise objection first
+ Compliance badges immediate
+ Security doc as primary CTA (pre-qualifies)
+ Best for: Security-conscious industries
+ Best for: IT decision makers


APPROACH 3: Productivity-Focused

Hero Section:
---
Headline: "Ship Enterprise Features 10x Faster"
Subheadline: "AI agents that write, test, and review
code at enterprise scale. 500+ teams building faster."

CTA: "See It In Action" (primary)
CTA: "Start Free Trial" (secondary)

Social proof: "4.9/5 from enterprise customers"
---

Rationale:
+ Focuses on engineering team benefit
+ Concrete outcome (10x faster)
+ Demo as primary CTA (shows capability)
+ Best for: Engineering leaders
+ Best for: Technical evaluators

Phase 4: Full Page Copy Delivered
---
Selected: Approach 1 (ROI-Focused)

Complete sections written:
✓ Hero (headline, subhead, CTAs)
✓ Logo bar (suggested companies)
✓ Benefits section (5 key benefits)
✓ Features (8 features as business outcomes)
✓ Security & compliance section
✓ Case study (fictional but realistic)
✓ ROI calculator (formula provided)
✓ Pricing table (3 tiers)
✓ FAQ (10 questions)
✓ Final CTA section

Word count: 2,500 words
Conversion elements: 7 CTAs, 12 trust signals

Phase 5: A/B Testing Plan
---
Test 1: Hero Headlines
A: "Cut Development Costs by 40% With AI"
B: "Enterprise Teams Ship 10x Faster With AI"
C: "The AI Platform 500+ Enterprise Teams Trust"
Metric: Scroll depth, time on page
Duration: 2 weeks, 5,000+ visitors

Test 2: Primary CTA
A: "Calculate Your ROI"
B: "Book Demo"
C: "Start Free Trial"
Metric: Conversion rate
Duration: 2 weeks

Expected performance:
- Conversion rate: 5-8% (enterprise typical)
- Demo booking rate: 3-5%
- Avg time on page: 3+ minutes

✓ Landing page complete (3 minutes)

Product Launch Email

/content:good [write product launch email sequence for new AI testing feature]

What happens:

Agent: copywriter
Type: Email sequence (3-email series)
Goal: Feature activation

Phase 1: Research
---
Analyzing:
- Best performing product launch emails
- Testing tools positioning (Jest, Cypress, etc.)
- User feedback about testing pain points

Key insights:
✓ Developers hate writing tests (tedious)
✓ But value test coverage (quality/confidence)
✓ Time is main objection
✓ Trust is critical (accuracy concerns)

Phase 2: Sequence Strategy
---
Email 1 (Day 0): Announcement + quick win
Email 2 (Day 3): Deep dive + social proof
Email 3 (Day 7): Urgency + special offer

Phase 3: Email Series Created
---

EMAIL 1: The Announcement
---
Subject line variations:
A: "We just made testing 10x faster 🚀"
B: "Your new testing superpower is here"
C: "Testing used to suck. Not anymore."

Selected: A

Body:

Hi [First Name],

Quick question: How much time did you spend writing
tests last week?

If it's more than 2 hours, we have good news.

ClaudeKit now writes your tests automatically.

Unit tests. Integration tests. E2E tests. All generated
from your code in seconds.

Sarah's team tried it yesterday. Generated 247 tests
in 18 minutes. 94% coverage.

Want to try? It takes 30 seconds to set up:
[Quick Start Guide]

Happy testing (well, happy not testing 😄)
[Your name]

P.S. First 1,000 users get Pro features free for 30 days.

---
(153 words, 2 min read, 1 primary CTA)

Rationale:
+ Opens with relatable question
+ Quantifies pain (time spent)
+ Introduces solution clearly
+ Real example with metrics
+ Easy CTA (30-second setup)
+ PS creates urgency


EMAIL 2: The Deep Dive
---
(Sent 3 days later to non-openers and openers who didn't click)

Subject: "How ClaudeKit generated 247 tests in 18 minutes"

Body:

Hey [First Name],

Remember Sarah's team from our last email?

Here's the full story of their first week with
AI-powered testing...

[Day 1]: Generated 247 tests in 18 minutes
[Day 3]: Found 8 bugs before production
[Day 7]: Achieved 94% test coverage

"We used to dread writing tests. Now it's automatic."
- Sarah Chen, Engineering Lead @ TechCorp

How it works:
1. Install ClaudeKit CLI (1 command)
2. Run: claudekit test generate
3. Review generated tests
4. Commit and push

That's it. No configuration. No prompt engineering.

Watch it in action: [3-min demo video]

Or try it yourself: [Start free trial]

[Your name]

P.S. Our Pro features trial ends in 4 days. Don't miss it.

---
(168 words, includes video CTA alternative)

Rationale:
+ Continues Sarah's story (narrative thread)
+ Provides specific timeline
+ Includes testimonial with attribution
+ Shows simplicity (3 steps)
+ Two CTAs (watch or try)
+ PS reinforces urgency


EMAIL 3: The Urgency Push
---
(Sent 4 days after Email 2, to non-converters)

Subject: "Your Pro trial expires in 24 hours ⏰"

Body:

[First Name],

Quick heads up: Your free Pro trial expires tomorrow.

After that, AI testing returns to the waitlist.

What you'll lose access to:
❌ Automatic test generation
❌ E2E test creation
❌ 95%+ coverage guarantee
❌ Priority support

What you keep:
✓ Manual test writing
✓ Weekend debugging sessions
✓ Low test coverage stress

Just kidding (mostly) about the last two 😅

But seriously—500+ teams already activated their tests.

The setup takes 30 seconds.
The time saved: 20+ hours/month.

Ready? [Activate AI Testing Now]

Not for you? No problem. [Give us feedback]

[Your name]

P.S. Reactivating later means joining the waitlist.
Do it now while you can.

---
(129 words, clear urgency, humor to soften)

Rationale:
+ Clear urgency (24-hour deadline)
+ Uses loss aversion (what they'll lose)
+ Humor makes urgency less pushy
+ Social proof (500+ teams)
+ ROI reminder (20+ hours/month)
+ Easy out (feedback link)
+ PS reinforces consequences

Phase 4: A/B Testing Recommendations
---
Email 1 Subject Lines:
Test A: "We just made testing 10x faster 🚀"
Test B: "Your new testing superpower is here"
Expected: A wins (specific + emoji)

Email 2 CTA:
Test A: "Watch demo" vs "Try it yourself"
Expected: "Try it" wins (lower friction)

Email 3 Send Time:
Test A: 9am vs 2pm
Expected: 9am wins (checked morning)

Sequence performance targets:
- Email 1 open rate: 35-45%
- Email 2 open rate: 25-35%
- Email 3 open rate: 20-30%
- Overall activation rate: 12-18%

✓ Email sequence complete (2 minutes 45 seconds)

When to Use

✅ Use /content:good for:

Strategic Blog Posts

/content:good [write thought leadership post on AI in software development]

Landing Pages

/content:good [write landing page for enterprise product]

Important Emails

/content:good [write product launch email sequence]

White Papers

/content:good [write whitepaper on AI code review ROI]

Sales Pages

/content:good [write sales page for annual subscription]

Campaign Copy

/content:good [write multi-channel campaign for new feature]

❌ Don’t use for:

Quick Social Posts

Use /content:fast instead (seconds vs minutes)

Simple Announcements

Use /content:fast for speed

Internal Docs

Use /docs:update instead

Research Process

Competitor Analysis

What it examines:
- Top 5-10 competitors
- Their messaging and positioning
- Content that performs well
- Gaps in their content
- Opportunities to differentiate

Audience Research

What it analyzes:
- Target audience pain points
- Language they use
- Objections they have
- Triggers that motivate them
- Platforms they use

Content Performance Data

What it reviews:
- Top-performing similar content
- Engagement patterns
- Conversion benchmarks
- SEO keyword opportunities
- Social share patterns

Quality Indicators

/content:good Quality

Research depth:      ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Strategic thinking:  ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Multiple variations: 3-5 with rationale
A/B test strategy:   ✓ Included
Time:               2-5 minutes
Use for:            Strategic content

/content:fast Quality

Research depth:      ⭐⭐☆☆☆
Strategic thinking:  ⭐⭐⭐☆☆
Multiple variations: 3-5 quick versions
A/B test strategy:   Basic suggestions
Time:               5-15 seconds
Use for:            Quick content needs

Output Files

After /content:good completes:

Content Variations

content/good/[type]-v1-[approach].md
content/good/[type]-v2-[approach].md
content/good/[type]-v3-[approach].md

Each variation with full copy

Research Report

content/good/[type]-research-[date].md

Contains:

Competitor analysis
Audience insights
Content strategy
Rationale for approaches

A/B Testing Plan

content/good/[type]-ab-tests-[date].md

Detailed testing recommendations

Strategic Brief

content/good/[type]-brief-[date].md

Overall strategy and guidelines

Best Practices

Provide Clear Goals

✅ Good:

/content:good [write landing page copy for enterprise product targeting
VPs of Engineering, goal is demo bookings, emphasize security and ROI]

❌ Vague:

/content:good [write landing page]

/content:good [write blog post about AI testing, our unique angle is
we achieved 95% coverage in production with 1000+ companies, competitor
X focuses on unit tests only, competitor Y is expensive]

Specify Audience

/content:good [write for technical audience: senior developers who
evaluate tools, skeptical of AI, value code quality over speed]

Include Constraints

/content:good [write email sequence, brand voice is professional but
friendly (see ./brand-voice.md), avoid hype, be specific with data]

Time Investment vs Quality

                   Time      Quality    Best For
/content:fast      10s       ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆    Quick needs, social media
/content:good      2-5min    ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐    Strategic, conversion-critical
Manual writing     2-8hrs    ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆    Unique thought leadership

After Generation

Standard workflow:

# 1. Generate content
/content:good [detailed request]

# 2. Review research report
cat content/good/[type]-research-*.md

# 3. Review all variations
cat content/good/[type]-v*.md

# 4. Read rationale for each
# (Included in each variation file)

# 5. Select best approach (or combine elements)

# 6. Customize if needed

# 7. Implement A/B tests
cat content/good/[type]-ab-tests-*.md

# 8. Track performance

Metrics to Track

After publishing content:

Engagement Metrics

Time on page
Scroll depth
Bounce rate
Social shares
Comments/discussions

Conversion Metrics

Primary goal completions
CTA click rates
Form submissions
Trial signups
Demo bookings

SEO Metrics

Search rankings
Organic traffic
Click-through rate from search
Featured snippets
Backlinks acquired

Next Steps

/content:fast - For quick content needs
/content:cro - Optimize for conversion
/content:enhance - Improve existing content

Key Takeaway: /content:good creates strategic, high-quality content backed by research and competitor analysis, providing multiple variations with detailed rationale and A/B testing recommendations—perfect for conversion-critical and brand-defining content.