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/email-composer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/email-composer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/email-composer/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/email-composer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing/email-composer.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 | $0.00037 | $0.02127 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.01064 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00425 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00213 |
Grade A, and why
email-composer 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 — 314 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Email Composer
Draft professional emails for business and marketing contexts.
Email Categories
1. Outreach & Prospecting
- Cold outreach (personalized, value-first)
- Warm introduction follow-ups
- Partnership proposals
- Speaking and podcast pitches
2. Client Communication
- Project kickoff
- Status updates and reports
- Scope change discussions
- Invoice and payment follow-ups
- Deliverable handoffs
3. Internal / Team
- Campaign briefs
- Performance recaps
- Cross-functional requests
- Meeting agendas and follow-ups
4. Sales & Proposals
- Proposal cover emails
- Pricing discussions
- Objection handling
- Contract and SOW follow-ups
- Win-back campaigns
Structure Framework
Every email follows this structure:
Subject: [Specific, not generic — include key value or action]
[Opening — context in one sentence: why you are writing]
[Body — 2-3 short paragraphs max, bullet points for multiple items]
[CTA — one clear, specific ask]
[Sign-off — matched to relationship level]
Tone Calibration
| Tone | Characteristics | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Formal | Complete sentences, no contractions, titles, "Dear..." | C-suite, legal, first contact with enterprise |
| Professional | Direct but warm, contractions OK, first names | Clients, colleagues, vendors |
| Casual | Conversational, personality OK, still clear | Internal team, close working relationships |
| Urgent | ACTION REQUIRED flag, bold deadlines, consequences | Time-sensitive, blocking issues |
Subject Line Formulas
| Formula | Example |
|---|---|
| Action + Topic + Deadline | "Review: Q1 Campaign Brief by Friday" |
| Number + Benefit | "3 Quick Wins from Your GA4 Data" |
| Question | "Can we schedule 15 min to discuss the Shopify migration?" |
| Value + Context | "Your Klaviyo Audit Results (3 Revenue Opportunities)" |
| Urgency + Specificity | "Action needed: Tracking code missing from 4 pages" |
Key Principles
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 · 314 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 7d801de01c3c
email-composer is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository thatrebeccarae/claude-marketing (133 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 2,127 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.