↗Free · the whole file is below
A Claude skill that writes follow-ups worth sending
What each follow-up is for, and when to stop rather than send another.
Nothing gated, no email address, MIT licensed, adapted from open-source work and credited below
Why this one exists
Follow-ups are where sequences are lost, and not because people mind receiving them. They are lost because most follow-ups contain nothing that was not in the first email, and the reader learns that the sender has nothing else to say. This file gives each position in the sequence a job, keeps a list of the angles already spent, and does something no template does: it tells you to end the sequence when the angles run out instead of filling the remaining slots.
What is in it
The judgements the file encodes
This is the part a general prompt does not give you. Each one is a decision we have already made and written down.
| It encodes | Which means |
|---|---|
| Sequence length is a capacity decision first | The file opens with the arithmetic, before any copy advice: each person consumes one send per step, so capacity divided by steps is the number of new people a day you can sustain. Two extra steps cost roughly a third of the people you will ever reach. If you cannot write a real angle for email four, that is the sequence telling you it should be three steps long. |
| A job per position, not five variations | Email two names the cause behind the symptom. Email three changes the entry point entirely and does not reference the earlier ones. Email four is the last real attempt and admits it. Email five closes the loop and is the shortest of the lot. Each is a different email rather than the same one at a different volume. |
| Angle discipline, tracked in the output | Every email spends an angle and cannot spend it again, so the output carries the list of angles used and what is left. When the list is empty the recommendation is to stop. That is the instruction most sequences need and almost no template contains. |
| The postscript gives something real away | It is the most read line in a cold email, so it holds the specific, named thing you actually wrote, offered on reply rather than linked. It has to exist before the campaign sends: a postscript offering something imaginary is how a warm reply gets wasted. |
| No apology, ever | Not for following up, not for the earlier email, not for their time. An apology invites the reader to agree that the email was an interruption, and it is the single most common opening in a second email. |
Where this came from
Provenance, and what we changed
This file started as somebody else's open-source work, under a licence that lets us adapt and republish it. Here is the whole of what that means for this one.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Based on | An MIT-licensed open-source skill of the same name |
| Original licence | MIT, which is what permits this adaptation. |
| Adapted by | TheCold.Ai, on 2026-09-18. |
| What changed |
|
| This file's licence | MIT. Copy it, change it, use it with your own clients. |
The same information is in the frontmatter of the file itself and in a Credits section at the bottom of it, so it stays attached when somebody copies the file onto their own machine. The licence evidence, including the date it was read, is kept in the repository this site is built from.
The file
SKILL.md, in full
Exactly what is committed, frontmatter included. Copy it into a folder named after the skill, wherever your assistant reads them from.
SKILL.md
---
name: copywriting-follow-up
description: >-
Writes the follow-up emails after no reply, each one carrying a new angle
rather than a reminder. Use when someone asks for a follow-up, a second or
third email, a bump, a breakup email, or what to send when a prospect has gone
quiet. Use before sending anything that begins with just checking in, because
the position in the sequence decides the angle and this file sets both.
license: MIT
metadata:
based_on: An MIT-licensed open-source skill of the same name
upstream_license: MIT
adapted_by: TheCold.Ai
adapted_on: "2026-09-18"
changes:
- British English throughout; dashes and emoji removed
- A section added on why the number of steps is a capacity decision before it is a copy decision
- The postscript rule rewritten so a named resource is offered on reply rather than linked
- Word limits aligned with the rest of the library
- The accuracy rules rewritten as four plain categories rather than coloured markers
---
# Follow-up after no reply
The follow-up is where most sequences are lost. Not because people are annoyed
by them, but because most follow-ups contain nothing that was not in the first
email, and the reader learns that the sender has nothing else to say.
Every email here carries a new angle. If it does not, it is a reminder that you
want something, and a reminder is worse than silence.
Answer in the language the person is writing in.
## Before anything else: how many steps
The number of emails in the sequence is a capacity decision before it is a copy
decision, and it is usually made by accident.
Every person added to a campaign consumes one send for each step. So the number
of new people a mailbox fleet can take each day is its daily sending capacity
divided by the number of steps. A fleet sending 240 emails a day sustains 48 new
people a day on a five step sequence, and 80 on a three step one.
Illustrative figures, not measured from any account. The shape is the point: two
extra steps cost you roughly a third of the people you will ever reach. They are
worth having only if each of them carries something genuinely new, which is what
the rest of this file is about. If you cannot write a real new angle for email
four, that is not a writing problem. It is the sequence telling you it should be
three steps long.
## Phase 1: gather the context
In one message, ask for what is missing:
- What email one said, and the angle it used.
- How long ago, and what has been sent since.
- The prospect: title, seniority, sector, company size.
- Which position in the sequence this email is.
- Whether anything has changed since email one: a new signal, a new hire, news.
- What data exists per prospect.
If the angle of email one is unknown, ask for the email itself. Writing a follow
up without seeing what it follows produces the exact repetition this file
exists to prevent.
## Phase 2: why follow-ups fail
| Mistake | Why it fails |
|---|---|
| "Just checking in" | No new value, and it announces that there is none |
| Repeating email one | It was ignored once; repetition confirms the decision |
| "Did you get my last email?" | Reads as passive aggression, and costs the reply |
| Longer than email one | If the short version did not work, a longer one will not |
| More features | The wrong direction entirely. Nobody is buying features here |
| "I have been trying to reach you" | Guilt, which is the fastest route to an unsubscribe |
| A vague bump | "Wanted to follow up on my previous message" is an empty email |
### What a follow-up has to do
**Carry something new.** A different cause of the same problem, a different
consequence, a different person inside the company who feels it, a resource they
can use whether or not they ever buy.
**Never apologise for sending it.** You are writing because you think you can
help. Treat it as a continuation, not an interruption. An apology invites the
reader to agree that it was one.
**Escalate in specificity, not in pressure.** Each email is slightly more direct
than the last. More specific, not more desperate.
## Phase 3: what each position is for
### Email 2: go one layer down
Take the problem from email one and name its cause rather than its symptom.
Do not quote email one. Pick the story up where it left off. Diagnose why the
problem keeps happening. The ask can be slightly more direct than the first
one's.
Openings that work:
- The cause: "That usually comes from one thing: the handover is verbal."
- The consequence: "When that persists, the quoting backlog is what shows it."
- The reframe: "Most managers fix the symptom. The lever is one step upstream."
### Email 3: change the entry point
A different pain, a different person's pressure, a market or timing trigger, or
the cost of doing nothing over a year.
Do not reference emails one or two. This is a fresh start. The reader has no
memory of the earlier ones, and reminding them of two ignored emails is the
opposite of a fresh start.
Openings that work:
- Another pain: "There is a second problem that usually sits alongside that one."
- Another stakeholder: "The board sees the number. What drives it is further down."
- Timing: "With the year end coming, this is usually when it surfaces."
- Risk: "The current way works, right up until somebody leaves."
### Email 4: the last real attempt
High value, low pressure. Acknowledge that they may have this solved, or that
you may have the wrong person. The ask is the most direct of the sequence.
Only write this email if it has something to say. A fourth email that repeats
the third is where a sequence turns into a nuisance, and the capacity arithmetic
at the top of this file says what it costs you.
### Email 5: close it cleanly
Three to five sentences, the shortest of the sequence. One final useful thing,
then a line that makes it easy for them to answer "not now" or "wrong person".
The closing line is not optional and it is not a guilt trip. "Assuming this is
not a priority, which is fair enough. If it becomes one, you know where I am."
A clean ending is worth more than a fifth angle. People remember how a sequence
stopped.
## Phase 4: the rules for every follow-up
- Shorter than the email before it. Every time.
- One hundred and fifty words at most in the body.
- One ask, and it is answerable in a word.
- No links. If something is offered, it is sent on reply.
- No apology, no guilt, no reference to how many times you have written.
- One new angle, named in the output so it cannot be reused later.
- No invented number, result or customer outcome.
### The postscript
A postscript in emails two and three is the most read line in a cold email and
the best place to give something away.
Format: one sentence naming a specific, real thing, offered on reply.
"P.S. Wrote a page on how three firms handle the handover without adding
headcount. Want it?"
It must exist. If it does not exist yet, either write it before the campaign
sends or drop the postscript. A postscript offering something imaginary is how a
warm reply gets wasted.
### Angle discipline
Keep a list of the angles already used. Each email spends one and cannot spend
it again. When you run out of genuine angles, the sequence is finished,
regardless of how many steps were planned.
## The angle bank
**Pain.** The root cause, the second-order consequence, the cost of the
workaround, the thing that breaks when somebody is on holiday.
**People.** The person above them who sees a number, the person below them who
does the work, the person who leaves and takes the process with them.
**Timing.** Year end, the planning cycle, a renewal, a season in their trade,
the month the volume arrives.
**Risk.** What the current way costs on a bad day rather than a normal one. Key
person dependency. What an auditor or a client would ask.
**Resource.** A specific thing you wrote, named precisely, offered with nothing
attached.
## Phase 5: what to output
**The email.** Position in the sequence, the angles already used, the new angle
in one sentence, the target, any new signal since email one, and the variables.
Then the subject line and the body.
**Why this angle.** Three bullets: what is genuinely new, why it suits this
position, and why this ask fits.
**Word count** against the limit, and a note if it is longer than the previous
email, which it should not be.
**The updated sequence map.** Every angle spent so far, and what is left. If
nothing is left, say so and recommend ending the sequence rather than filling it.
## Accuracy
Four categories. Only the first two may appear as stated fact.
1. **Verified.** Use freely.
2. **A reasonable inference** for this role or sector. Use it, phrased as an
observation rather than a claim about them.
3. **Unsupported.** Remove it, or turn it into a question.
4. **Invented.** A metric, a result, a customer outcome. Never, under any
framing, in any email.
## Not for you if
- You want a five step sequence because a template said five. Read the capacity
section again.
- You want to re-send email one with a new subject line. That is the thing this
file is built to stop.
- Nobody replied to any of it. Then the problem is the list or the offer, and
another angle will not find it.
---
## Credits
Adapted by TheCold.Ai, a B2B outbound agency in Middlesbrough, England, from an
open-source `copywriting-follow-up` skill published under the MIT licence. What
changed is listed in this file's frontmatter under `metadata.changes`. The
licence terms are reproduced in the LICENSE file of the download bundle at
thecold.ai/claude-skills/. Not affiliated with Anthropic, or with the authors of
the upstream files.
MIT licensed. Copy it, change it, use it with your own clients. Save it as SKILL.md inside a folder named after the skill. The description line in the frontmatter is what decides when your assistant reaches for it, so if you edit anything, edit that last.
When to skip it
This is not worth your time if
Questions about this skill
Straight answers. If yours isn't here, ask it on the call: we'd rather tell you no than sell you the wrong thing.
As many as you have genuinely new angles for, and no more, which in practice is two or three. The file makes you name the new angle before it writes the email, so a fourth one with nothing to say cannot be produced without noticing. There is also a hard cost to length: on a fixed sending capacity, every extra step reduces the number of people you can put into the campaign at all.
The rest of writing and replies: copywriting-refiner, cold-email-writer, copywriting-first-touch and reply-handler. Everything sits on the library page, next to the first email, which is the one people usually want after this. What we do for money is outbound, and none of it is a condition of using this.
Claude is a product of Anthropic. TheCold.Ai is not affiliated with, endorsed by or connected to Anthropic.