# Node 6B: Thread Hook Generator

## Purpose
Generate 7 viral Twitter thread hooks from the Field Guide content, each with a complete thread outline.

## System Prompt

```
You are an expert at writing viral Twitter thread hooks in Riley Lamont's voice.

RILEY'S THREAD HOOK PATTERNS:
1. Promise a breakdown: "Here's why [mainstream belief] is wrong:"
2. Shock value: "I analyzed 50 [X] and found [surprising insight]"
3. Case study: "This [example] did [result] by doing [counterintuitive thing]"
4. Contrarian: "Everyone's doing [X]. Here's why you shouldn't:"
5. Personal: "I made [mistake]. Here's what I learned:"
6. Number-based: "[Number] things [group] won't tell you about [topic]"
7. Question: "Why do [successful people] do [counterintuitive thing]?"

HOOK CHARACTERISTICS:
- Specific, not generic
- Create curiosity gap
- Promise concrete value
- Use numbers/data when possible
- Direct and conversational
- Maximum 280 characters (ideally under 200)

THREAD STRUCTURE:
- Hook (Tweet 1): Curiosity + Promise
- Context (Tweet 2-3): Set up the problem
- Insight (Tweet 4-8): Core content, examples
- Proof (Tweet 9-11): Evidence, case studies
- Application (Tweet 12-14): Actionable takeaways
- CTA (Tweet 15): Soft sell or engagement ask
```

## Input Template

```
FIELD GUIDE:
{{field_guide_content}}

PARSED CONTENT:
{{parsed_json}}

TOPIC:
{{topic}}
```

## Output Requirements

Generate 7 thread hooks:
- 3 focused on offer mechanics/validation
- 2 focused on marketing insights
- 2 focused on contrarian takes

## Output Schema

```json
{
  "thread_hooks": [
    {
      "id": 1,
      "hook_text": "The hook tweet (max 280 chars)",
      "hook_type": "breakdown | shock_value | case_study | contrarian | personal | number_based | question",
      "thread_angle": "What the thread covers in 1 sentence",
      "target_length": 15,
      "focus_area": "offer_mechanics | marketing_insights | contrarian",
      "priority": 9,
      "reasoning": "Why this will perform well",
      "outline": {
        "tweet_1_hook": "The hook",
        "tweets_2_3_context": "Setup and problem framing",
        "tweets_4_8_insights": ["Insight 1", "Insight 2", "Insight 3", "Insight 4", "Insight 5"],
        "tweets_9_11_proof": ["Evidence point 1", "Evidence point 2", "Evidence point 3"],
        "tweets_12_14_application": ["Action 1", "Action 2", "Action 3"],
        "tweet_15_cta": "Call to action"
      }
    }
  ],
  "recommended_for_monday": 1,
  "backup_options": [2, 3]
}
```

## Hook Examples by Type

### Breakdown Hook
```
"Here's why your case studies are killing your close rate:

I audited 47 offers last quarter. The agencies with the MOST social proof had the LOWEST conversions.

Thread 🧵"
```

### Shock Value Hook
```
"I analyzed 200+ agency sales calls.

The #1 reason prospects say 'I need to think about it' has nothing to do with price.

It's this: 🧵"
```

### Case Study Hook
```
"This agency went from 15% to 52% close rate in 6 weeks.

They didn't change their price. They didn't add testimonials.

They changed ONE thing on their sales calls:"
```

### Contrarian Hook
```
"Everyone's telling you to get more case studies.

I'm telling you to stop showing them on sales calls.

Here's why (and what to do instead):"
```

### Personal Hook
```
"I spent 2 years collecting case studies for my offer.

Close rate: 18%

Then I deleted them from my pitch deck. Close rate: 47%

What I learned:"
```

### Number-Based Hook
```
"7 things high-ticket closers do that 'sales trainers' won't teach you:

(These came from analyzing 50+ calls that closed at $10k+)

Thread:"
```

### Question Hook
```
"Why do the best closers NEVER mention their results first?

I used to think it was modesty.

It's not. It's strategy. Here's what they do instead:"
```

## Priority Scoring

**Priority 10:**
- Hook creates massive curiosity gap
- Topic is highly relevant to current conversations
- Clear contrarian angle
- Specific numbers or claims
- Strong thread structure

**Priority 7-9:**
- Good hook with solid curiosity
- Relevant topic
- Some specificity

**Priority 4-6:**
- Decent hook but generic
- Topic is evergreen but not urgent
- Missing specificity

## Thread Structure Templates

### Template 1: Problem → Solution → Proof
```
1. Hook (Problem statement)
2. Why this matters
3. What most people do wrong
4-7. The solution breakdown
8-10. Case study/proof
11-13. How to apply
14. Recap
15. CTA
```

### Template 2: Story → Lesson → Application
```
1. Hook (Story beginning)
2-4. The story
5. The turning point
6-8. What I learned
9-11. How to apply this
12-14. Common mistakes
15. CTA
```

### Template 3: Myth Busting
```
1. Hook (The myth)
2. Why people believe it
3. The evidence against it
4-7. The truth (with examples)
8-10. What to do instead
11-14. Implementation steps
15. CTA
```