--- name: nowork-studio/google-ads-copy source: https://app.decimal.ai/s/nowork-studio-google-ads-copy@2/SKILL.md source_sha256: 485179cacbd3 --- # Ad Copy Generator + A/B Tester Write Google Ads RSA copy and run structured tests to find winning messaging. ## Setup Read and follow `../shared/preamble.md` (MCP detection, account selection) and `../shared/analysis-principles.md` (evidence requirement, guardrails). Both apply throughout. ## Reference Read on demand: - `references/rsa-best-practices.md` — character limits, headline formulas, pinning, A/B mechanics, common mistakes. The source of truth for what to write. - `references/rsa-testing-lab.md` — how to choose RSA test metrics, diagnose ad-group intent bloat, decide pinning, and avoid chasing Ad Strength over business outcomes. - `../manage/references/industry-benchmarks.md` — industry CTR/CVR benchmarks for sanity-checking targets. - `../manage/references/quality-score-framework.md` — only when QS improvement is the explicit goal. ## Business context — non-negotiable input Every copy decision is grounded in business context. Read `{data_dir}/business-context.json` and `{data_dir}/personas/{accountId}.json` first. - If either file is missing or empty, recommend `/google-ads-audit` before writing — generic copy that ignores positioning is wasted ad inventory. The full intake procedure (website crawl, schema, bootstrapping) lives in `../audit/references/business-context.md`. - If the user volunteers new info (new service, changed positioning, seasonal update), merge it in. How context shapes copy: services map to headline categories; locations earn local-specific headlines (with QS upside); brand voice sets tone and forbidden words; differentiators ARE the value-prop headlines; competitors sharpen positioning (without naming them); seasonality decides urgency vs. evergreen framing; offers feed time-sensitive variants; landing-page content must match (or conversions drop). Personas drive language: their own search-term phrasing in headlines, their pain points in descriptions, their decision-trigger as the CTA angle. ## Ad-strength vs. real performance Ad strength optimizes for Google's diversity goals, not your conversion rate. The hierarchy: **conversion rate > CTR > CPA > ad strength.** Don't break a high-CTR ad to chase "Excellent". Do treat low ad strength as a useful diversity signal — eight distinct headlines, one per category, no repeats in description bank. ## Pulling what to write from Copy must be grounded in what already converts. One `runScript` with `ads.gaqlParallel` covers almost any copy job — fan out: - `ad_group_ad` — current headlines, descriptions, ad-strength, per-ad clicks/CTR/conversions (the baseline to beat) - `keyword_view` — what's converting and which QS components are weak - `search_term_view` — the actual phrases customers are typing (the single best language source) - `campaign` — the CTR/CVR benchmark each variant has to clear For brand-wide rewrites, correlate everything in one pass. For a single ad group, scope each query with `WHERE ad_group.id = …`. Layer in seasonality and keyword-landscape context from `business-context.json`. If the user has a CRM or lead-outcome database with the language customers actually use, mine that — customer language beats marketing language every time. ## Copy output contract Every proposal needs a small decision record, not just a block of headlines: - A **concept ID** and one-sentence hypothesis: `persona × motivation × angle`. - A **claim ledger** for every proof, offer, rating, guarantee, price, or superlative: exact source (account data, business context, approved landing page, or user-provided evidence) and whether it is approved for ad use. - Complete RSA assets with character counts and pin positions, plus a distinct challenger concept when testing. Do not turn a vague request into fabricated proof. If a claim is attractive but unsupported, label it `needs_substantiation` and write a claim-free alternative. A citation to a competitor, an unverified review site, or general industry knowledge is not approval to use a claim in an ad. ## Competitive copy rules - **Never** name a competitor in ad copy (policy risk + you do their brand awareness for free). - **Never** use "best" / "#1" without verifiable substantiation. Google requires it; the Trademark team enforces it. - **Do** use specific features competitors lack ("Same-Day Service" beats "Better Service"), trust signals ("4.9★ Google · 500+ Reviews"), guarantees, transparent pricing, and location specificity. Verifiable specificity outperforms superlatives. ## RSA mechanics Google RSA: up to **15 headlines (30 chars max)** and **4 descriptions (90 chars max)**. A single character over = rejected. Always count. `references/rsa-best-practices.md` is the source of truth for headline formulas, description ordering, and pinning strategy. The compact rule of thumb: pin one Service+Location headline to position 1, one CTA to position 3, leave position 2 unpinned for Google to test value-prop / trust / differentiator headlines, and never pin more than 3 total. ## A/B testing — use the experiments framework When the user wants to test, use the MCP server's experiment tooling rather than the old "deploy two paused ads side by side" pattern: - **Ad-copy A/B** — `createAdVariationExperiment` is the dedicated tool for variation testing at the ad level. It manages the split, the lift comparison, and the read-back. - **Larger creative shifts** (different angle, different persona target, different LP destination) — `createExperiment` + `addExperimentArms` + `scheduleExperiment`. Monitor with `listActiveExperiments` and `listExperimentAsyncErrors`. Decide endgame with `endExperiment`, `graduateExperiment`, or `promoteExperiment`. - **Single ad-group, two variants, no traffic split** — paused-then-enabled twin ads in the same ad group is still acceptable for low-stakes copy iteration, but it has no statistical engine behind it. Prefer the experiment path when the decision matters. Each variant must test a **meaningfully different angle** — not word swaps. "Trust & Expertise" vs. "Speed & Convenience" vs. "Price & Value" is a real test; "Call Today" vs. "Call Now" is noise. Before writing variants, read `references/rsa-testing-lab.md` when the request mentions testing, pinning, Ad Strength, low CTR/CVR, or mixed-intent ad groups. It encodes the generalized pattern that many RSA problems are really ad-group/query-theme problems. Before launch, record one primary metric, any guardrail metric (for example CPA or qualified-lead rate), the planned minimum exposure or duration, and the decision rule. Do not peek and declare a winner from an early gap: less than ~100 clicks per variant is usually too early, and even a 2× CVR gap still needs enough conversions and a check for recent changes. The experiment framework's own significance signals are the cleanest input — defer to them when present. After a winner: pause the loser, then iterate against the winner. Never stop testing. ## Operating principles 1. **Business context is non-negotiable.** No `business-context.json` / `personas` → recommend `/google-ads-audit` before writing. 2. **Confirm before deploying.** Show the exact copy, character counts per asset, and pin positions. Get a yes, then push. 3. **Every write is undoable for 7 days** via `undoChange` (assuming the entity hasn't been modified since). 4. **Differentiate, don't imitate.** Generic copy that could belong to any competitor is a wasted ad slot. 5. **Defer to `/google-ads`** for bid / budget / keyword work — this skill writes copy and runs creative experiments only.