Optimize · Subject-Line & A/B Variants
Test Curiosity vs Specificity Subject Lines
Generate matched pairs of curiosity-driven and specificity-driven subject lines for a head-to-head A/B.
When to use
Use this when you can't tell whether your ICP opens for intrigue ("a weird thing on your pricing page") or for hard specifics ("3 broken redirects on /pricing"). The prompt produces 5 matched pairs so the only variable across each pair is the lever — which gives a clean signal in 1-2 weeks of sending.
The prompt
You are a cold-email specialist for a digital marketing agency. You design A/B tests where the only variable changing is the lever being measured. Agency: [AGENCY_NAME] — [SERVICES] | Email body: [EMAIL_BODY] | Prospect ICP: [ICP_DESCRIPTION] | A real, observable detail about the prospect: [SPECIFIC_DETAIL] | Sending volume per variant: [SENDS_PER_VARIANT] Produce 5 matched A/B pairs of subject lines. In each pair, variant A uses CURIOSITY (intrigue, open loop, vague hint) and variant B uses SPECIFICITY (numbers, named pages, named tools, exact findings). Same underlying message — only the lever changes. - Max 6 words per subject - Lowercase, no emoji, no "quick question", no fake Re:/Fwd: - Specificity variant MUST reference [SPECIFIC_DETAIL] truthfully - Curiosity variant must NOT be clickbait — body must deliver on the hint - No spam triggers Markdown table with columns: Pair # | Curiosity (A) | Specificity (B) | Which to ship first and why (1 line). After the table, recommend the lever to bet on for this ICP and the minimum sample size per variant.
Variables
[AGENCY_NAME]Your agency name[SERVICES]Services you sell[EMAIL_BODY]Full email body the subjects must support[ICP_DESCRIPTION]1-line ICP description[SPECIFIC_DETAIL]A real specific you observed (a page, a tool, a number, a hire)[SENDS_PER_VARIANT]How many sends per variant per week, e.g. 250
Example input
Agency: ClickReef — Google Ads for ecom DTC | Email body: offer to rebuild their Performance Max asset groups | ICP: $2-15M DTC brands on Shopify | Specific detail: their PMax ROAS is 1.4 on Branded, missing asset group separation | Sends per variant: 250/week
Example output
| Pair | Curiosity (A) | Specificity (B) | Ship first | |---|---|---|---| | 1 | something off in your pmax | branded pmax at 1.4 roas | B — number is undeniable | | 2 | one asset group fix | split your branded pmax | B — names the action | | 3 | your pmax is leaking | pmax leaking on branded | B — leak + where | | 4 | a 4-min pmax audit | pmax audit, branded first | B — concrete sequence | | 5 | ecom ads weird trend | branded roas trending down | A — trend hook works DTC | Bet on SPECIFICITY for $2-15M DTC founders — they audit by numbers, not vibes. Min sample: 1,000 sends per variant (400 opens) for a 5pt detectable lift.
Pro tips
- Send pairs from the same mailbox same week — different mailboxes = confounded test.
- If curiosity wins on opens but specificity wins on replies, ship specificity. Opens don't pay.
- Re-test quarterly — ICP fatigue flips winners faster than you think.
Free 20 minute sales audit
A prompt is not a system.
These are free and they work. What they cannot do is make your team run the play every week. That is the part we install.
Book a Free Sales Audit