Email Craft
Parent: Writing and Documentation · Published reference · snapshot 2026-09-08 · skill writing-expert/references/email-craft.md
↓ Facts as markdownall context files
General-purpose professional email writing. Optimized for the 90% of work email that isn't sales, isn't customer support, and isn't an exec announcement.
These notes link each claim to its source. Some citations identify archived research reports that are no longer hosted on this site. A published reference means the content is available; it does not certify independent review or accuracy.Read the editorial policy and follow the sources before relying on a claim.
Email Craft
- General-purpose professional email writing. Optimized for the 90% of work email that isn't sales, isn't customer support, and isn't an exec announcement. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#email-craft]
1. The subject-line contract
- Two-part structure: [Topic]: [Purpose]. The colon does the work. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#1-the-subject-line-contract]
- "Q3 forecast: need your number by Thu noon" [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#1-the-subject-line-contract]
- "Onboarding doc: review request (10 min)" [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#1-the-subject-line-contract]
- Prefixes: Action:, Decision needed:, FYI:, Question:, Reminder:, Intro:. Avoid Following up, Quick question. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#1-the-subject-line-contract]
- Length: 2-7 words wins. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#1-the-subject-line-contract]
2. BLUF: Bottom Line Up Front
- The first sentence states the conclusion, the ask, or the decision needed. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#2-bluf-bottom-line-up-front]
3. One ask per email
- If the email has two asks, it has zero asks. Split into two emails, each with its own subject line. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#3-one-ask-per-email]
- Test: can you summarize the ask in one sentence starting with a verb? "Please review X by Friday." [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#3-one-ask-per-email]
4. To / Cc / Bcc: a deliberate decision
- To: people who must act or reply. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#4-to-cc-bcc-a-deliberate-decision]
- Cc: people who need to be informed but don't owe a reply. Use sparingly. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#4-to-cc-bcc-a-deliberate-decision]
- Reply-all: default to No. Only when the answer materially changes what other recipients should do. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#4-to-cc-bcc-a-deliberate-decision]
5. The "would this fit in Slack" test
- Anything you want a searchable, durable record of. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#5-the-would-this-fit-in-slack-test]
- Long-form content (>3 paragraphs). [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#5-the-would-this-fit-in-slack-test]
- Anyone whose Slack hours don't overlap yours. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#5-the-would-this-fit-in-slack-test]
6. The "phone vs email" judgment
- Pick up the phone when: [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#6-the-phone-vs-email-judgment]
- The topic is emotional, sensitive, or carries firing/conflict/HR risk. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#6-the-phone-vs-email-judgment]
- You're on email round 3+ on the same thread without resolution. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#6-the-phone-vs-email-judgment]
- Tone-sensitive feedback, layoffs, performance, breakups. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#6-the-phone-vs-email-judgment]
7. Follow-up cadence
- Day 0: original email [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#7-follow-up-cadence]
- Day 3-4: polite nudge, reply on the same thread [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#7-follow-up-cadence]
- Day 7-10: third nudge, change channel [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#7-follow-up-cadence]
- Beyond: stop. The non-answer is the answer. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#7-follow-up-cadence]
9. Send-time decisions
- Internal, ongoing relationship → send when drafted. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#9-send-time-decisions]
- External, senior, or first contact → schedule Tue-Thu 10am recipient-local. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#9-send-time-decisions]
- Drafted after 9pm → always schedule for 9am next workday. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#9-send-time-decisions]
10. Signature hygiene
- A good signature is 4 lines or fewer: [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#10-signature-hygiene]
The Five Cs of email — pre-send quality check
- Clear. Can the reader understand the message on a single read? [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
- Concise. Is every sentence earning its place? [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
- Complete. Does the email contain everything the reader needs to act? [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
- Correct. Spelling, grammar, names, titles, numbers, dates, attachments. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
- Courteous. Is the tone proportionate to the relationship and the stakes? [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
- "We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused." [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
- "Per my last email..." / "As I mentioned..." [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
- "This is a known issue." (without immediately following it with a workaround) [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#the-five-cs-of-email-pre-send-quality-check]
Anti-Patterns
- The wall of text - five paragraphs, no whitespace, no BLUF. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#anti-patterns]
- The hidden ask - buried in paragraph 4. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#anti-patterns]
- Reply-all "thanks!" - multiplies inbox noise by N for zero value. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#anti-patterns]
- The midnight send - signals burnout culture. Schedule for next morning. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#anti-patterns]
- Bcc'ing the boss as surveillance - corrosive, almost always discovered. [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#anti-patterns]
References
- Harvard Business Review - 5 Tips for Writing Professional Emails (2022) [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#references]
- The Essential Guide to Crafting a Work Email - HBR (2015) [archived source: https://llms-explorer.com/sources/mdb-context-hub/email-craft/#references]
Where this helps
- Writing routine work email that needs to be read and acted on quickly — status updates, requests, scheduling — the 90% of email that isn't sales, support, or an exec announcement. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Deciding whether a message belongs in email at all versus Slack or a phone call, using the 'would this fit in Slack' and 'phone vs email' judgment calls. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- An email keeps accumulating asks and Cc'd people because nobody applied the one-ask-per-email and deliberate-Cc discipline before sending. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- A recipient needs to be able to triage the message from the subject line alone before opening it — the subject-line contract exists for exactly this. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
How to apply this
- Write the subject line as [Topic]: [Purpose] so the recipient can triage from the inbox list without opening the message. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Open with BLUF — state the conclusion, the ask, or the decision needed in the first sentence, then support it below. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Run the one-ask-per-email test before sending: can the ask be summarized in one sentence starting with a verb? If there are two asks, split into two emails. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Run the Five Cs pre-send quality check as a final pass before hitting send, rather than relying on a single read-through. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
Common mistakes
- Burying the ask in the third paragraph instead of leading with it — this is the single most common failure the BLUF principle exists to prevent. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Defaulting to reply-all when the answer doesn't materially change what other recipients should do, which trains people to skim or ignore future threads. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Stacking multiple unrelated asks into one email, which reliably produces zero completed asks instead of one. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Sending as email content that would resolve faster as a two-line Slack message or a two-minute call — the channel choice itself is often the actual mistake. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
Known issues
- The guidance targets the 90% case of routine work email; it explicitly does not cover sales email, customer support replies, or exec-wide announcements, which have their own conventions. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- The 'would this fit in Slack' test depends on team culture — some orgs treat Slack as the durable record and email as ephemeral, which inverts the test's assumptions. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Subject-line discipline only helps if the sender maintains it consistently; a single vague subject line in an otherwise well-run thread still breaks triageability. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
- Follow-up cadence guidance assumes a responsive recipient in a similar working rhythm; it needs adjustment across time zones or asynchronous-first teams. [source] — AI-suggested, synthesized from this pack's existing facts — not extracted from a source document.
Children
- Subject Line Discipline (frontier)
- BLUF Opening (frontier)
- One Ask Per Email (frontier)
- Reply-All Etiquette (frontier)
- Follow-Up Cadence (frontier)
- Breakup Email (frontier)
- Cold Outreach (Non-Sales) (frontier)
- Intro Request and Double Opt-In (frontier)
- Thank-You Notes (frontier)
- Send-Time Decisions (frontier)
- Phone vs Email Judgment (frontier)
- Slack vs Email Test (frontier)
- Signature Hygiene (frontier)
- Attachment vs Link (frontier)
- Email Tone and Register (frontier)
Frontier under this node: Attachment vs Link, BLUF Opening, Breakup Email, Cold Outreach (Non-Sales), Email Tone and Register, Follow-Up Cadence, Intro Request and Double Opt-In, One Ask Per Email, Phone vs Email Judgment, Reply-All Etiquette, Send-Time Decisions, Signature Hygiene, Slack vs Email Test, Subject Line Discipline, Thank-You Notes