Which tool to choose
For titles, the generic AI assistant is perfect: it generates dozens of variants in an instant, which on your own facing the blank page is the real bottleneck. Its strength here is the quantity of options; the final choice, based on your audience, stays yours.
- Finding the title of an article or a page: generic AI assistant, ten variants with different levers.
- Improving a title that doesn't work: same tool, in diagnosis mode.
- Titles for emails and message subject lines: same approach, calibrated to the subject line.
How to do it
- Open the AI assistant.
- Give it three things: what the content is about, who the reader is, and what they'll get by reading it. Without the benefit for the reader, every title is mute.
- Ask for ten variants with different levers, not a single title.
- Choose, then shorten: titles that are too long get cut in search results and in social previews.
The operational syntax for generating titles:
Act as a copywriter expert in titles that get clicks without deceiving.
Content: "[what it's about]". Reader: "[who they are]". What they get by reading: "[the benefit]".
Give me 10 titles, two for each of these levers:
- Number (e.g. "5 ways to...").
- Curiosity (creates a question in the head, without unfairly hiding its answer).
- Direct benefit (the result they get).
- Question (the one the reader is already asking).
- How-to (the promise of a practical solution).
Constraints: each title has to keep what it promises. No bait the content doesn't repay. Keep them under 60 characters where you can.
The operational syntax for improving a title:
Here's a title of mine that doesn't get clicks: "[current title]".
The content is about: "[topic]". The reader is: "[who]".
Tell me:
1. Why this title is weak (is it vague, does it promise nothing, is it too long?).
2. What someone who would click on this topic is really looking for.
3. Give me 5 stronger versions, each honest about the content.
The operational syntax for email subject lines:
I have to write the subject line of an email about: "[email content]".
Recipients: "[who they are and what relationship they have with me]".
Give me 8 different subject lines that get the email opened:
- Some that spark curiosity, some that state the benefit right away.
- Short: the subject line is read on a phone screen, where space is scarce.
Constraints: no tricks like a fake "Re:" or false urgency. Honesty, or today's open is tomorrow's unsubscribe.
After choosing, do the promise test: does the content keep what the title promises? If the title says "the definitive method" and inside there's just any old tip, you have a trap-title that costs you trust. You get the click once; trust, you lose only once.
A real example
Sara wrote on a plant shop's blog and her titles were descriptive: "Succulent Care." No one clicked. She asked the AI for ten variants with different levers, giving as the reader "someone who kills every plant they buy" and as the benefit "keeping them alive effortlessly."
Among the ten, "Why Your Succulents Die (and the 3 Mistakes You Make Without Realizing It)" combined curiosity and number, and promised a real solution the article actually contained. Sara chose it, shortened it a bit, and the clicks went up. She'd stopped describing the topic and started speaking to the reader's problem.
When it does NOT work (and how to fix it)
If the titles are hyped and fake
The AI, trained on a lot of aggressive marketing material, tends toward exaggeration: "incredible," "that will change your life." Cut: add "no superlatives, no exaggerated promises, a credible tone." A sober title that keeps its promise beats a shouted one that disappoints.
If they attract clicks but people leave right away
It's the sign of a trap-title: it promises more than the content delivers. Search engines and social platforms notice, because they see people bouncing right back, and they lower the visibility. The remedy is upstream: ask the AI for titles "honest about the content," and if the content doesn't hold the promise, improve the content, not the title.
If the title gets cut in the results
Long titles get truncated in search results and previews, and the part that matters disappears. Keep the important words at the start and shorten: ask "put the promise in the first words and stay under 60 characters." What the reader sees has to be enough to decide.
A tip from someone who actually uses it
Always generate ten titles and don't fall in love with the first one you like: often the winner is the seventh, the one you'd never have thought of on your own. The value of the AI here is exactly the quantity of different angles. And when you can, test two titles on the same content and watch which one gets more clicks: on what really works, the audience is always more right than your taste.
Frequently asked questions
Do titles with numbers really work better?
In many cases yes: a number promises a clear structure and a quick read ("3 mistakes," "5 ways"), and that reassures someone in a hurry. But it's not a rule to apply always: a sharp question or a direct benefit sometimes beats the number. That's why it's worth generating different types and choosing, instead of relying on a single formula.
What's the difference between a title that sparks curiosity and clickbait?
One line: honesty. Both create the urge to know, but the curiosity title keeps its promise when you open, clickbait doesn't. The first builds an audience that comes back; the second loses it after one click. Curiosity is a legitimate tool as long as the content repays it.
Doesn't using formulas for titles make everything the same and already seen?
That's the fear to dispel. Formulas are psychological levers, not ready-made texts: the same lever (curiosity, number, benefit) generates completely different titles depending on the topic and the reader you put into it. What tires the reader isn't the formula, it's the empty title that promises and doesn't keep. A tested lever filled with a real, specific benefit sounds fresh, because it speaks precisely to them.