Publisher: Corey Haines · Editorial profile by AI Tools Ratings · Review method
Not runtime tested; source-document review only. Referenced scripts were not executed or comprehensively audited. No security certification.
What task is this skill designed for?
Draft an onboarding flow for opted-in users, with an exit rule after activation.
What input and output should you expect?
Input: Approved product facts, audience permission context, entry and exit events, tone, destination links and prior campaign lessons.
Output: A sequence overview, timing, drafts and measurement plan; expected, not independently tested. No messages are sent by drafting.
What does it need to run?
An Agent Skills-capable client and the relevant flow-design or copy reference files. A separate email service is needed for delivery.
Publisher README declares support for Agent Skills clients including Claude Code, Codex and Cursor. This is author-declared, not independently runtime tested.
How should you approach installation?
- Inspect the pinned source, license and task-specific reference files before installing anything.
- Follow the publisher README guidance for your actual client; no installation command or cross-client compatibility was independently tested here.
- Try the illustrative prompt with synthetic input in a separate folder, inspect the output against the checklist and approve external actions separately.
Installation guide: discovery, dependencies and runtime checks
What files, accounts or data can it access?
Reads context and writes drafts. Configured integrations may access customer records; start with fictional recipients and authorize live account changes separately.
What does the skill cost?
The inspected source license is MIT. Agent subscriptions, model usage, dependencies and external services have separate costs and terms. No paid runtime was tested.
What are its limits and alternatives?
Copy quality does not establish consent, deliverability or correct triggers. Delayed exit events can send irrelevant messages; merge fields and links need their own checks.
Use Copywriting for a single page section. Use your delivery platform to implement suppression and unsubscribe behavior after review.
What could you ask in a small trial?
Try this with a small sample:
Draft three emails for a fictional opted-in user. Specify entry, delay, CTA and exit rules. Use placeholder links and do not send or configure an automation.
How would you verify the result?
- Check branches against activation and unsubscribe events.
- Verify merge fields, links and factual claims.
- Trial the flow with fictional internal records before activation.
Use a baseline and record acceptance evidence before treating a successful task as a reliable workflow.
Which source and license were checked?
Read the reviewed SKILL.md at its pinned commit · Complete reviewed folder
Repository and current publisher guidance
Checked:
MIT — identified in LICENSE at the reviewed commit. Dependencies and third-party assets may have separate terms. License evidence
Version details and review scope
Source: coreyhaines31/marketingskills/skills/emails
Reviewed commit: e85f3cbc2e4a79bf33b2a12e9bdd9087d414735b
SKILL.md SHA-256: 8709631cc21717d17db9bb7e787ea44768d77182daf9846de8718a2ae7433b91
Source-document review. Source text and stated dependencies were inspected for this profile. Referenced code was not comprehensively audited, no runtime test was performed, and source files are not mirrored here.