Trigger-Aware Email Generator: Match Copy to the Event That Caused It

Trigger-aware generation starts with the event, not the email format. Signup, failed payment, shipment delay, and product browse have different facts, urgency, permissions, and next actions.

Event-to-message map

Input format

Provide event name, event ID, timestamp, recipient state, relevant facts, consent category, competing workflows, and exit event. Include a list of claims the generator is allowed to make.

Output format

For each event, return:

• event interpretation;
• message purpose;
• subject and preheader;
• body and CTA;
• required variables and fallbacks;
• delay and send window;
• suppression and exit;
• unsupported-claim warnings;
• QA cases.

Example

Event: shipment.delayed
Facts: order_id, item_summary, carrier_status, next_update_date
Allowed claim: shipment is delayed according to carrier status
Forbidden claim: guaranteed delivery date
CTA: view tracking or contact support

The resulting email should not mention a payment, discount, or cart. That sounds obvious, but it is exactly what a generic generator fails to enforce.

Evaluation

Run the same prompt with several event fixtures and compare whether purpose, claims, variables, and exits change. Reject outputs that use a generic template, omit a missing-data fallback, or introduce unsupported urgency.

The workflow engine should own the actual event routing and suppression. The generator proposes the specification; it should not decide who receives a message at send time.

Build a trigger dossier

For every trigger, capture the event schema, source, timestamp semantics, recipient identity, allowed claims, delay, priority, and exit. A short dossier gives the generator enough context to distinguish “shipment delayed” from “delivery estimate changed” and “payment failed” from “payment method expires soon.”

The generator should repeat unknowns in its QA warnings, not turn them into polished guesses.

Compare outputs across events

Use a fixture suite with the same recipient and different events. The subject, purpose, facts, CTA, suppression, and urgency should change where the event changes. If every output says “take the next step,” the model is paraphrasing a template rather than using the trigger.

Test late and duplicate events, missing optional fields, a state transition before send, competing journeys, and a recipient without marketing consent. Keep the workflow engine responsible for the final eligibility check.

Review claims and timing separately

A reviewer should see a factual diff and a policy diff: which event fields became copy, which claims are unsupported, what delay was proposed, and which exit cancels the message. Require approval for security, billing, legal, health, discount, and delivery claims. The generator can accelerate the draft, but the event contract remains the boundary around what the email is allowed to say.