Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketingWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/cro-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/cro-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/cro-auditor/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/cro-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/cro-auditor.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00065 | $0.01693 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00847 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00339 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00169 |
Grade A, and why
cro-auditor scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CRO Auditor
Conversion Rate Optimization — audit landing pages, funnels, forms, and CTAs for friction and opportunities.
Audit Framework
Heuristic Evaluation (LIFT Model)
Score each page element on 6 dimensions:
| Factor | Question | Increases/Decreases Conversion |
|---|---|---|
| Value Proposition | Is the benefit clear and compelling? | Increases |
| Relevance | Does this match what brought the user here? | Increases |
| Clarity | Is the message and action obvious? | Increases |
| Urgency | Is there a reason to act now? | Increases |
| Anxiety | Are there concerns about taking action? | Decreases |
| Distraction | Are there elements competing for attention? | Decreases |
Page-Level Audit Checklist
Above the Fold
- Value proposition visible without scrolling
- Primary CTA visible and prominent
- Hero image/visual supports the message (not stock photo)
- Navigation does not distract from primary conversion goal
- Page loads in under 2.5 seconds (LCP)
Value Proposition
- Headline communicates specific benefit (not feature)
- Subheadline provides supporting detail
- Unique differentiator is clear (why you vs alternatives)
- Social proof near the value proposition (logos, count, rating)
Call to Action
- CTA text is action-oriented and specific ("Start Free Trial" not "Submit")
- CTA button contrasts with page design (stands out visually)
- Single primary CTA per page section (no competing actions)
- CTA appears multiple times on long pages (top, middle, bottom)
- Microcopy near CTA reduces anxiety ("No credit card required")
Social Proof
- Customer logos (if B2B)
- Testimonials with real names, photos, and specific results
- Case studies or metrics ("Helped 5,000+ companies increase revenue by 34%")
- Trust badges (security, certifications, awards)
- User count or activity ("Join 50,000+ marketers")
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 9d ago First seen · 176 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 3d6d7aec3e80
cro-auditor is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing (133 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 1,693 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.
cli-error-handling
CLI command error handling patterns.
prefer-assertions-over-defensive-checks
Prefer assertions over defensive checks when data is guaranteed to be valid.
prefer-direct-imports-over-module-mocks
Prefer extracting a testable core over vi.mock / vi.resetModules when unit tests need to reach production logic entangled with config, env, or singletons.