purple-cow-audit

name	purple-cow-audit
description	Score product remarkability 1-10 to decide if it's worth promoting. Seth Godin's Purple Cow test. Triggers on: "is this product worth promoting", "should I promote", "product audit", "purple cow", "remarkable product", "is it remarkable", "rate this product", "product quality check", "worth my reputation", "product evaluation", "would I recommend without commission", "product remarkability score", "evaluate this affiliate product", "quality gate for promotion".
license	MIT
version	1.0.0
tags	["affiliate-marketing","research","niche-analysis","program-discovery","differentiation","positioning"]
compatibility	Claude Code, ChatGPT, Gemini CLI, Cursor, Windsurf, OpenClaw, any AI agent
metadata	{"author":"affitor","version":"1.0","stage":"S1-Research"}

Purple Cow Audit

Quality gate for affiliate marketers: score a product's remarkability 1-10 before promoting it. Based on Seth Godin's Purple Cow — if the product isn't remarkable, no amount of marketing skill will make it convert sustainably. The key question: "Would I recommend this to a friend WITHOUT earning a commission?"

Stage

S1: Research — Evaluating a program's worthiness IS part of research and discovery. This is a quality gate before you invest time creating content, landing pages, and email sequences.

When to Use

• User is considering promoting a specific product
• User asks "is this product worth promoting?"
• User wants to evaluate product quality before investing time
• User says "purple cow", "remarkable", "audit", "evaluate", "quality check"
• Before investing time in S2-S5 skills for a specific product
• User has a list of programs from affiliate-program-search and needs to pick the best

Input Schema

product:                    # REQUIRED
  name: string              # Product name
  url: string               # Product website
  description: string       # OPTIONAL — what it does
  reward_value: string      # OPTIONAL — commission rate
  tags: string[]            # OPTIONAL — categories

comparison_products: string[] # OPTIONAL — competitors to compare against
                              # Default: auto-discovered

Chaining from S1 affiliate-program-search: If run, evaluate the recommended_program.

Workflow

Step 1: Research the Product

1. web_search: "[product] review 2024 2025" — find recent reviews
2. web_search: "[product] vs" OR "[product] alternative" — find competitors
3. web_search: "[product] complaints" OR "[product] problems" — find issues
4. Check product website for: pricing transparency, unique features, social proof

Step 2: Score Remarkability

Rate each dimension 1-10:

Dimension	Question	Weight
Uniqueness	Does it do something no competitor does?	20%
Quality	Is it genuinely excellent at its core job?	20%
Story	Does using it make you feel/look different?	15%
Word of mouth	Would users tell friends unprompted?	15%
Design	Is the experience delightful, not just functional?	10%
Problem fit	Does it solve a real, painful problem?	10%
Trust	Transparent pricing, good support, real social proof?	10%

Composite score = weighted average (1-10)

Step 3: Make Recommendation

Based on composite score:

• 8-10: PROMOTE — This is a Purple Cow. Go all in.
• 6-7: PROMOTE WITH ANGLE — Good product, needs strong positioning. Identify your unique angle.
• 4-5: CAUTION — Mediocre product. Only promote if commission is exceptional AND you can add significant value through bonuses.
• 1-3: SKIP — Not remarkable. Promoting this will damage your reputation. Find an alternative.

Step 4: Identify Remarkable Angles

For products scoring 6+, identify:

1. The 1-2 features that ARE remarkable (Purple Cow elements)
2. The angles that make it share-worthy
3. The audience segment for whom this IS a Purple Cow (even if not for everyone)

Step 5: Self-Validation

• Score is evidence-based (cited reviews, features, data)
• Recommendation is honest (not inflated by high commission)
• Remarkable angles are specific (not generic praise)
• Comparison with competitors is fair
• The "would I recommend without commission" test was honestly applied

Output Schema

output_schema_version: "1.0.0"
purple_cow_audit:
  product_name: string
  composite_score: number       # 1-10 weighted
  recommendation: string        # "promote" | "promote_with_angle" | "caution" | "skip"
  scores:
    uniqueness: number
    quality: number
    story: number
    word_of_mouth: number
    design: number
    problem_fit: number
    trust: number

  remarkable_angles: string[]   # What makes it a Purple Cow (for 6+)
  red_flags: string[]           # Concerns identified
  alternative_products: string[] # Better options if score < 6

remarkability_score: number     # Alias for composite_score (for chaining)

chain_metadata:
  skill_slug: "purple-cow-audit"
  stage: "research"
  timestamp: string
  suggested_next:
    - "affiliate-program-search"
    - "grand-slam-offer"
    - 
     

Output Format

## Purple Cow Audit: [Product Name]

### The Question
Would I recommend [product] to a friend WITHOUT earning a commission?
**Answer:** [Yes/No/With caveats]

### Remarkability Scorecard

| Dimension | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Uniqueness | X/10 | [specific evidence] |
| Quality | X/10 | [specific evidence] |
| Story | X/10 | [specific evidence] |
| Word of Mouth | X/10 | [specific evidence] |
| Design | X/10 | [specific evidence] |
| Problem Fit | X/10 | [specific evidence] |
| Trust | X/10 | [specific evidence] |
| **Composite** | **X/10** | |

### Recommendation: [PROMOTE / PROMOTE WITH ANGLE / CAUTION / SKIP]

[Reasoning — 2-3 sentences]

### Remarkable Angles (what to emphasize)
1. [Specific remarkable feature/aspect]
2. [Specific remarkable feature/aspect]

### Red Flags (what to be honest about)
1. [Concern]
2. [Concern]

### If Score < 6: Better Alternatives
- [Alternative 1] — [why it's more remarkable]
- [Alternative 2] — [why it's more remarkable]

Error Handling

• No product provided: "Tell me the product name and I'll audit its remarkability. Or run affiliate-program-search first."
• Product is too new/no reviews: Score based on available data, flag low confidence. "Limited data — revisit this audit in 3 months."
• User disagrees with score: "The score is a starting framework. If you have personal experience that changes the picture, tell me and I'll adjust."
• No alternatives found: Suggest running affiliate-program-search in the same category.

Examples

Example 1: "Is HeyGen worth promoting?" → Research reviews, features, competitors. Score across 7 dimensions. Result: 8/10 PROMOTE — remarkable for AI avatar quality, unique lip-sync tech, strong word of mouth.

Example 2: "Evaluate these 3 programs from my search results" → Score all 3 side-by-side. Compare composite scores. Recommend the Purple Cow.

Example 3: "Should I promote this random SaaS tool?" (generic tool, many competitors) → Research reveals: 5/10 CAUTION — competent but unremarkable. 4 competitors do the same thing. Suggest finding a more remarkable alternative or targeting a micro-audience where it IS remarkable.

Flywheel Connections

Feeds Into

• grand-slam-offer (S4) — remarkable angles become the offer's core messaging
• viral-post-writer (S2) — remarkable elements are what makes content shareable
• affiliate-blog-builder (S3) — audit insights inform honest review content
• landing-page-creator (S4) — remarkable features highlighted on the page

Fed By

• affiliate-program-search (S1) — products to evaluate
• competitor-spy (S1) — competitive landscape for comparison

Feedback Loop

• ab-test-generator (S6) reveals which remarkable angles resonate with audience → refine what "remarkable" means for your specific audience

References

• shared/references/case-studies.md — Real affiliate success stories
• shared/references/affiliate-glossary.md — Terminology
• shared/references/flywheel-connections.md — Master connection map