Overview
What it does
Profiles your hooks by the attention they earn — ranking archetypes by hook-rate and hold-rate across audiences and products.
When to use it
You want a standing map of which hook archetypes actually hold attention for your brand — broken out by audience and product. It's the scoring layer underneath the Hook Matrix Generator: profile first, then generate against what wins.
Pairs with MCP
Uplifted tags every hook and links it to hook-rate and hold-rate (the retention curve), so the model scores archetypes against real attention data instead of opinion.
Best for
Creative strategists, performance marketers, analysts.
Install
Drop this entire block into a SKILL.md file inside your Claude project’s .claude/skills/hook-dna-profiler/ folder. Claude auto-invokes it when you ask which hook types work for your brand.
---
name: hook-dna-profiler
description: Use this skill when the user wants to know which hook archetypes drive hook-rate and hold-rate for their brand, broken out by audience and product. Outputs a ranked, evidence-backed hook taxonomy — the scoring layer beneath hook generation.
---
# Hook DNA Profiler
You profile the brand's hooks by the attention they earn, not the impression they make.
## Data you need
- Every hook/opener in the library from Uplifted with: hook_style tag, audience_segment, product/SKU tag, hook_rate (3s view rate), hold_rate / retention at 25-50-75%, and downstream CTR/CVR where available
- Minimum: ≥30 hooks with attention data; below that, flag results as directional
## How to analyze
1. Group hooks by archetype (the hook_style tags). For each: median hook_rate, median hold_rate, and a conversion-weighted score.
2. Cross-cut by audience and by product — the same archetype can win one segment and bomb another.
3. Rank archetypes overall and within each major segment.
4. Identify "attention traps" — high hook_rate but collapsing hold_rate (they grab, then lose). These look like winners on the surface and aren't.
## Output format
HOOK DNA — [Brand]
RANKED ARCHETYPES (overall) — table: Archetype | n | Hook rate | Hold rate | Conv-weighted score | Read
BY AUDIENCE — top 2 / bottom 2 archetypes per major segment
BY PRODUCT — which archetype each product's winners rely on
ATTENTION TRAPS — archetypes that hook but don't hold; what to fix
USE NEXT — the 3 archetypes to feed into the Hook Matrix Generator for this brand
## Guidelines
- Separate hook_rate (grabs) from hold_rate (keeps) — never blend them into one "good hook" verdict.
- A high hook_rate with a steep hold drop is a problem, not a win. Call it out.
- Anything under ~30 hooks is directional; say so.Prompt
Profiles your hooks by the attention they actually earn, ranking archetypes by hook-rate and hold-rate across audiences and products. Use it to learn which opening styles deserve more of your budget.
Profile my hooks by the attention they actually earn.
Data from Uplifted: every hook with hook_style tag, audience_segment, product tag, hook_rate, hold_rate / retention (25/50/75%), and downstream CTR/CVR. {{paste or confirm MCP}}
1. By archetype: median hook_rate, median hold_rate, conversion-weighted score.
2. Cross-cut by audience and by product.
3. Rank archetypes overall and per segment.
4. Flag "attention traps" — high hook_rate, collapsing hold_rate.
Output: ranked archetype table (Archetype | n | Hook rate | Hold rate | Conv-weighted score | Read), top/bottom 2 per audience, archetype-per-product, attention traps, and the 3 archetypes to feed the Hook Matrix next.
Keep hook_rate and hold_rate separate. Flag grab-but-don't-hold hooks. Under 30 hooks = directional only.
EXPECTED OUTPUT:
- A ranked, evidence-backed taxonomy of your hook archetypes
- Where each archetype wins and loses by audience and product
- The attention traps to stop using, and the 3 archetypes to brief next