Made To Stick

Run the full SUCCESs stickiness audit on a draft message, pitch, announcement, slide, speech, landing page, or internal memo — the book's capstone diagnostic. Scores the draft across the six SUCCESs principles (Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, Stories) plus the Curse of Knowledge villain axis on a 0/1/2 per-dimension scale (it is a checklist, not an equation), quoting evidence from the draft for every score and producing a top-3 prioritized fix list ranked by impact times effort. Use this skill whenever the user says things like "audit this message", "score this draft", "is this sticky", "run the SUCCESs check", "run the checklist", "will people remember this", "how good is this pitch", "rate this against Made to Stick", "does this pass the kidney heist test", "will this land", "stickiness review", "why is nobody remembering our launch", "I need a communications review", or when any user pastes a draft and asks whether it will resonate, be remembered, or change behavior. Also triggers when a

Diagnose a draft for the Curse of Knowledge — the expert blind spot that makes insiders write copy full of unexplained jargon, buried assumptions, strategy-level abstractions, and tacit shared context that lose non-expert audiences. Use this skill whenever reviewing a pitch, announcement, explainer, landing page, onboarding doc, slide, internal memo, or technical write-up for clarity to a non-expert. Activate when the user says things like "why isn't my message landing", "make this clearer", "my audience doesn't get it", "I can't tell if this is too technical", "diagnose this draft", "is this too jargony", "expert blind spot", "tapper listener", "translate for non-experts", "audit this for jargon", "I'm too close to this", or provides a draft plus an audience description and asks for a clarity critique. Also triggers when a user complains that smart readers stare blankly at their copy, when an explainer is full of acronyms, when an announcement leads with context instead of news, or when a strategy deck reads

Pick the strongest credibility evidence for a claim and kill weak evidence chains with the Sinatra Test. Use this skill whenever the user asks 'how do I prove this?', 'how do I make this more credible?', 'which statistic should I cite?', 'do I need a source for this?', 'how do I build trust?', 'this claim sounds unbelievable', 'they won't believe us', 'we need a case study', 'should I quote an expert?', 'is this testimonial strong enough?', 'which proof point should I lead with?', 'my pitch needs more evidence', 'the numbers aren't landing', 'how do I back this up without a credentials wall?', 'who should say this for maximum credibility?', or 'is one example enough or do I need data?'. Also invoke when the user has a marketing claim, sales pitch, fundraising ask, research finding, policy argument, product benefit, or security/reliability promise and must choose between authority quotes, customer stories, statistics, vivid details, testable demos, or a single hero example. This skill ranks evidence across six

Scan a draft, pitch, or copy for the named failure modes that kill stickiness — buried leads, decision paralysis, common-sense sedation, semantic stretch, stats-without-story, abstract strategy talk, scope creep, and the direct-message fallacy. Use this skill whenever a user asks to audit a draft, diagnose why a message is not landing, review a pitch, find the problems in copy, spot issues in an announcement, critique a marketing page, debug a speech, or check an internal memo — even when they do not explicitly use the word "stickiness". Activate on phrases like "audit this draft", "what is wrong with this message", "why is not this landing", "find the problems in this copy", "review my pitch", "spot the issues", "this is not resonating", "my announcement fell flat", "tell me what is broken in this email", "diagnose this speech", "why does not anyone remember what I said", "critique my copy", or any situation where the user supplies a short-form prose artifact and asks for a rigorous problem diagnosis rather