/cold-outreach

Cold outreach

Write outreach that proves attention, makes one reasonable ask, and respects the recipient and applicable rules.

Choose a mode

• Single message: one email, introduction request, follow-up, or professional direct message.
• Sequence: coordinated touches with distinct purposes and stop conditions.
• Audit: diagnose existing copy, research, cadence, deliverability, or compliance risk.
• Reply handling: answer a positive reply, objection, referral, out-of-office, unsubscribe, or rejection.

Do not create a campaign when one message is enough.

Workflow

1. Inspect supplied context and existing messages. Establish sender, recipient, relationship, goal, offer, proof, and requested next step without re-asking known facts.
2. Research current recipient signals when research is authorized and useful. Prefer the person's work, company pages, filings/releases, job posts, interviews, and public writing. Record URLs and retrieval dates.
3. Separate verified facts, sender-provided claims, and inference. Never invent familiarity, praise, mutual contacts, urgency, results, or social proof.
4. Draft the shortest message that can establish relevance and make the ask. Use length and subject-line guidance as defaults, not universal laws.
5. For a sequence, give every touch a different job and widening space where appropriate. Define stop conditions before copy.
6. For reply handling, match the state: answer the question, reduce friction, propose the next step, or stop. Never continue after an opt-out.
7. Check sender identity, authentication, list provenance, suppression handling, required identification/opt-out language, and applicable jurisdiction before recommending volume. If jurisdiction or recipient type is unknown, flag the legal uncertainty rather than declaring compliance.
8. Read copy aloud. Remove generic flattery, throat-clearing, fake scarcity, hidden asks, manipulative guilt, and unsupported claims.

Ask only for a missing fact that materially changes the message. If a fact is useful but non-blocking, draft with a clearly marked confirmation note.

Load conditional references

• For a single message or audit, read single-message patterns. Read single-message examples only when an example is useful.
• For a sequence, read sequence design. Read sequence examples only when needed.

References are heuristic libraries, not mandatory workflows. This file is authoritative.

Output contract

For a single message, return:

• subject or channel opener;
• send-ready body;
• one meaningfully different opening when useful;
• facts requiring confirmation and source notes, separate from copy.

For a sequence, return a table with touch, timing rationale, channel, purpose, copy, stop condition, and measurement. For an audit, identify the issue, evidence, impact, and rewrite. For reply handling, return send-ready copy plus the intended next state.

Verify

• The opener depends on this recipient or situation.
• Every material claim is verified, sender-provided, or marked for confirmation.
• There is one clear ask or next step.
• Sequence touches are not paraphrases of one another.
• Opt-out, bounce, reply, referral, and out-of-office states have stop or routing rules.
• Research notes are not mixed into send-ready copy.
• Any timing, benchmark, deliverability, or legal claim is sourced and dated or presented as a testable default.

Sequence examples

These examples show distinct jobs, not a mandatory cadence. Replace every claim with verified sender evidence.

Compact email sequence

Touch 1 — relevance and ask

Subject: [specific verified signal]

Hi [Name] — noticed [signal]. We help [comparable user] [outcome] by [mechanism], and [verified proof].

Worth sending a short example for [their context]?

Touch 2 — clarify or lower friction

Hi [Name] — one clarification: [brief point that prevents a likely misunderstanding].

If a call is premature, I can send [small useful artifact] instead.

Touch 3 — value without an ask

This [resource/checklist/example] may be useful given [signal]: [link]. It covers [specific value].

The artifact must be genuinely useful and safe to open. Do not disguise another pitch as “value.”

Touch 4 — verified proof

[Comparable customer/context] changed [metric] from [before] to [after] over [period] using [mechanism]. The relevant similarity is [specific mapping].

If useful, I can walk through the implementation constraints.

Skip this touch when proof is not nameable, comparable, and authorized.

Final touch — close

I’ll close the loop here. If [problem] becomes a priority later, the easiest way to reach me is [channel].

Multichannel variation

• Connection request: accurate reason to connect; no compressed pitch required.
• Public engagement: participate only when there is something genuine to add.
• Email: carry the substantive relevance and ask.
• Direct message: use only for a channel-appropriate clarification, not a duplicate email.

Stop-condition record

Positive reply: human owner within [service level]
Question/objection: cancel remaining touches; respond in thread
Referral: verify permission and context before contact
Out of office: pause to return date
Opt-out/complaint/bounce: suppress across all channels
No response after final touch: stop

Sequence design

Use a sequence only when repeated contact is proportionate to the relationship, value, and jurisdiction. The main skill controls research, compliance, output, and verification.

Design the state machine first

Define states and stops before cadence:

• no response → next distinct touch after an appropriate interval;
• positive/qualified reply → stop automation and route to a human;
• question/objection → answer it, do not send the scheduled template;
• referral → contact the referred person only with authorized context;
• out of office → pause until the stated return date;
• unsubscribe, complaint, invalid address, or hard bounce → suppress immediately;
• not now → record an authorized follow-up time or stop.

Give each touch one job

Possible jobs:

1. establish relevance and make the initial ask;
2. clarify one point or reduce the ask;
3. provide a genuinely useful artifact without a hidden call request;
4. add verified proof that maps to the recipient's situation;
5. offer a referral or asynchronous alternative;
6. close politely and stop.

Skip any job the sender cannot execute honestly. Do not paraphrase the original pitch.

Cadence

Choose intervals from recipient expectations, sales cycle, channel rules, and urgency. Widening intervals are often less intrusive, but no fixed sequence length, weekday, or send time is universally optimal. Treat timing as an experiment and use recipient-local time.

For multichannel contact:

• respect each platform's rules and cultural norms;
• do not create fake engagement before pitching;
• do not repeat the same message on every channel;
• coordinate suppression across channels.

Measurement

Prefer:

• delivery, hard bounce, complaint, unsubscribe;
• positive, neutral, negative, and referral reply rates;
• qualified next-step rate;
• time to reply and touch that influenced the response;
• downstream conversion with an explicitly qualified attribution model.

Open tracking can be unreliable and privacy-invasive. Do not optimize copy solely on opens.

Experiment hygiene

Test one meaningful variable at a time when volume supports interpretation. Predefine the population and outcome. Avoid declaring a winner from tiny samples or comparing different recipient cohorts without adjustment.

Sequence audit

• Does every touch add information or value?
• Are all proof and personalization claims traceable?
• Are reply states removed from automation promptly?
• Is the final touch actually final?
• Does total contact pressure remain proportionate?
• Are suppression and jurisdiction rules enforced across tools?

Single-message examples

Adapt these structures; never copy facts, names, claims, or tone that do not belong to the sender.

Prospect with a verified operational signal

Subject: [company]’s [specific change]

Hi [Name] — saw [verified signal]. It usually creates [relevant operational consequence].

We helped [credible comparable context] achieve [verified result] by [brief mechanism]. Would it be useful if I sent the two-page breakdown?

[Name]

Use only when the consequence is a reasonable inference. Otherwise ask a question instead of asserting it.

Advice request

Subject: your decision on [specific topic]

Hi [Name] — your explanation of [specific work] changed how I’m thinking about [concrete decision].

I’m choosing between [A] and [B]. If you have a minute: what failure mode would you examine first?

[Name]

This keeps the request answerable without requiring a meeting.

Investor message

Subject: [company] — [round or concrete wedge]

Hi [Name] — your work with [relevant verified investment/thesis] made me think this may fit.

[Company] helps [customer] [outcome] through [mechanism]. [One verified traction or learning claim]. We’re raising [round/amount] to reach [specific milestone].

Open to a short overview?

[Name]

Do not cite a portfolio company without checking current involvement and conflicts.

Introduction request

Hi [Connector] — would you be comfortable introducing me to [Recipient] about [specific reason]?

Why it may be relevant to them: [one sentence]. Here is a forwardable note below. No worries if the fit or timing is unclear.

Give the connector a genuine opt-out and a complete forwardable note.

Confirmation notes kept outside copy

Confirm before sending:
- source and date for the opening signal;
- permission to name the customer or mutual contact;
- accuracy and time period of the result;
- sender identity, opt-out, and jurisdiction requirements.

Single-message patterns

This is a heuristic library. The main skill controls intake, safety, output, and verification.

Message architecture

A strong cold message usually needs three moves:

1. Relevant observation: a verified recipient or company signal and why it matters.
2. Credible connection: the sender's offer or experience mapped to that situation.
3. Reasonable next step: one low-friction ask appropriate to the relationship.

Compress, reorder, or omit a move when the context supports it. Do not force a credential sentence when usefulness or a warm connection is the real reason to reply.

Signal quality

Prefer signals that are current, specific, and relevant to the ask:

• the recipient's own writing, talk, product decision, or open role;
• an official company launch, filing, release, or documented change;
• a mutual contact the sender is authorized to mention;
• a concrete workflow or artifact the sender genuinely inspected.

Avoid generic admiration, scraped trivia, sensitive personal information, tragedy, or a signal unrelated to the offer. Keep the source and retrieval date outside send-ready copy.

Ask design

Match the ask to the value and relationship:

• answer one focused question;
• review a small artifact;
• route to the right person;
• take a short call with a reason and flexible scheduling;
• consider a clearly scoped offer.

Do not manufacture a specific time merely to satisfy a formula. A direct yes/no or referral ask may be lower friction.

Subject and opening defaults

• Make the subject accurate and recognizable in an inbox.
• Prefer specificity over curiosity tricks.
• Never fake a reply/forward thread or imply an existing relationship.
• The opening should lose meaning if pasted to an unrelated recipient.
• Treat character and word limits as mobile/readability checks, not universal success rules.

Deliverability and compliance check

Before volume, verify sending-domain authentication with the actual provider, mailbox reputation, bounce handling, suppression, opt-out processing, sender identification, list provenance, recipient type, and applicable jurisdictions. Use current provider and regulator documentation. Do not diagnose delivery from open rates alone; privacy features make opens unreliable.

Audit questions

• Is every claim supportable?
• Is relevance obvious before background?
• Is the message useful or merely personalized?
• Is there one visible next step?
• Could a recipient decline or opt out without friction?
• Does the copy sound appropriate for the sender's real voice and status?