MK-004 | Customer-value check for selling points
For a regular chat, upload packs/mk-004.md. It includes the shared rules, this method, and required references
Purpose
This skill delivers: The customer benefit associated with each selling point
Separate features, benefits, and evidence; do not claim exclusivity without competitor data
Required inputs
Available raw records: the proposed claim, product specifications or tests, actual customer questions, and usage conditions
Method Steps
- Break the claim into product capability, conditions where it works, and the user's resolved problem or completed task. Support the capability with specifications/tests and the task with customer records
- Keep a capability directly serving a known task as a value proposition. A true but irrelevant feature becomes supporting information or a different angle. Narrow an effect exceeding its evidence to the supported scope
- The word “you” is not a pass condition. A clear task can work without it; repeated “you” without an observable result still needs revision
- With missing context, give a conditional version using known situations and request one customer question or usage record. Missing capability evidence leaves the claim unresolved rather than validated by fluent copy
- Withdraw the lead benefit when new evidence invalidates the context or effect. Reconnect the benefit when the customer task changes instead of retaining the same persona assumption
Calculation and Interpretation
Deliver original claim, product fact, customer task, supported outcome, retain/rewrite/remove, and revision evidence. Numerical benefits must map to measurement under matching conditions
Check example (hypothetical): ten-hour battery evidence under matching use conditions supports avoiding charging during an eight-hour field shift. For a permanently plugged-in desk worker, move it to supporting specifications rather than leading with a field-work benefit
Decision rules authored by ThinkWithBlack, 2026-10-14; original course sources remain below
Required output fields
| Order | Field | How to complete |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Factual feature | Use source evidence, an intermediate method result, or an explicit unknown; do not invent information |
| 2 | Customer task | Use source evidence, an intermediate method result, or an explicit unknown; do not invent information |
| 3 | Tangible benefit | Use source evidence, an intermediate method result, or an explicit unknown; do not invent information |
| 4 | Basis for comparison | Use source evidence, an intermediate method result, or an explicit unknown; do not invent information |
| 5 | Suitable angle | Use source evidence, an intermediate method result, or an explicit unknown; do not invent information |
| 6 | Lead/supporting/to investigate | Use source evidence, an intermediate method result, or an explicit unknown; do not invent information |
| 7 | Reason | Use source evidence, an intermediate method result, or an explicit unknown; do not invent information |
Verification cases
MK-004-C05 | The specification is true, but no industry comparison data is available
Expected: Functional benefits may be proposed; do not claim the product is unique or number one
MK-004-C06 | The information consists only of technical terms
Expected: Explain their role under the known usage conditions first; do not invent unverified effects
Method sources
Source file: Meta廣告學程 101 讓AI幫你投出廣告
Location: USP
Source basis: extracted from course materials
Source URL: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/19GaScd4rGE8V4iqPfemeK8-QAwbSIeOKGpB5OwwTMlo/edit
English translation of source excerpt:
Help identify the product's USP (Unique Selling Proposition). This is also your first opportunity to communicate with the AI. It is good if it identifies the point, but if it does not get what you mean, make sure to tell it your thinking
