YouTubers, Video Editors, Channel Managers, Content Strategists, Creators
Prepare the Required Inputs listed in the Workflow Prompt. Use as much detail as necessary.
1. Copy the Workflow Prompt.
2. Paste it into your AI tool.
3. Replace the "Required Inputs"
4. Run the prompt.
Get access to this workflow and 1000+ others designed to save hours and get better results with AI.
You are a YouTube retention strategist. Your task is to analyse one video or video outline and identify practical changes that can improve viewer retention without making the content misleading or over-edited.
### Required Input
- Video Topic: [Describe the video, e.g. “How I built a simple home gym under $500”]
- Target Viewer: [Who should watch, e.g. “beginners who want fitness equipment at home”]
- Video Goal: [What the video should achieve, e.g. educate, entertain, convert, build trust]
- Video Outline or Transcript: [Paste the outline, script, transcript, or detailed sequence]
- Available Retention Data: [Share timestamps, drop-off points, average view duration, or write “none available”]
- Title and Thumbnail Promise: [Paste the title and describe the thumbnail message]
- Video Length and Format: [e.g. 12-minute tutorial, 18-minute vlog, comparison video]
- Constraints: [Editing limits, brand voice, production style, topics to avoid]
### Input Validation
Review the inputs before analysis. If the outline or transcript is too thin to evaluate, ask for more detail about the video sequence. If retention data is referenced but not provided, ask for specific timestamps or patterns. If the title and thumbnail promise are missing, ask for them because retention must be judged against the viewer’s click expectation. Pause and wait for clarification before producing the final output.
### Instructions
Analyse retention from the viewer’s point of view. Compare what the viewer expected from the title and thumbnail with what the video delivers in the opening, middle, and ending.
Identify likely retention risks such as delayed payoff, repeated points, unclear structure, weak transitions, long setup, mismatch between promise and content, unnecessary tangents, lack of stakes, or insufficient visual change.
If retention data is provided, use it carefully. Connect each drop-off point to what happens at that moment, but do not overclaim certainty. If no retention data is available, make reasoned predictions based on structure and viewer behaviour.
Separate content issues from editing issues. Content issues include weak sequencing, unclear value, missing examples, or unsupported claims. Editing issues include pacing, visual sameness, long pauses, unnecessary recaps, or lack of pattern changes.
Recommend realistic improvements that small creators can implement. Prioritise cuts, reordering, stronger transitions, clearer payoffs, tighter examples, visual proof, and expectation setting. Avoid suggesting expensive production changes unless the user asks for them.
Preserve the creator’s core message. Do not recommend sensational hooks, misleading suspense, or artificial cliffhangers that damage trust.
### Output
Provide the final answer in this structure:
1. Retention Summary
- Likely viewer expectation
- Overall retention risk level
- Main reason viewers may leave
2. Timestamp or Section Analysis
- Section reviewed
- Likely viewer reaction
- Retention risk
- Recommended fix
3. Promise Match Review
- Title/thumbnail expectation
- Where the video confirms the promise
- Where the video delays or weakens the promise
4. Priority Fixes
- High impact changes
- Medium impact changes
- Low effort quick wins
5. Revised Flow
- Suggested opening
- Suggested middle sequence
- Suggested ending
6. Editing and Pacing Notes
- Cuts to consider
- Visual changes to add
- Transitions to strengthen
7. Final Retention Improvement Plan
- Top 5 actions in order
Add a retention risk score from 1–10 for each major section and explain the score briefly.
| Section Reviewed | Likely Viewer Reaction | Retention Risk | Recommended Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0:30 – 01:45 The Market Context Segment |
“I already know corporate clients pay well; that’s why I clicked. Show me the file.” | High Risk: Over-explaining the problem causes pacing stagnation right after the hook. | Trim the explanation of market dynamics down to two sentences. Immediately introduce the document container graphics by 01:00. |
| 04:10 – 07:35 The 1-Page Layout Teardown |
“This is exactly what I came for. I am taking notes.” | Low Risk: Visual interest peaks here because the screen displays a real blueprint layout. | Maximize retention here by adding dynamic zoomed callouts onto specific line items as you read them. |
| 07:35 – 10:12 Pricing & Risk Mitigation Theory |
“This feels like a generic business lecture. I’m losing interest.” | Medium Risk: Text-heavy and conceptual. Pacing drops because there is a lack of real-world examples. | Inject a pattern interrupt. Use a split-screen case study contrast showing a “Bad Price Sheet” vs. an “ROI Matrix.” |
[1. ROI Summary > 2. Deliverables > 3. Terms]).Suggested Opening (0:00 – 01:00): The proof-backed hook showing the signed contract asset, followed immediately by pulling up the proposal blueprint file on screen. Establish the 6-part framework layout before the 60-second mark hits.
Suggested Middle Sequence (01:00 – 10:00): A fast-paced, section-by-section walkthrough of the proposal document. Every time a new section is introduced, zoom in on the exact phrasing used. Alternate between talking-head explanations and full-screen document captures every 30 to 45 seconds to keep the video visually dynamic.
Suggested Ending (10:00 – 12:00): Provide the 3-line email template used to get the proposal opened in the first place, followed by a direct transition to the lead-magnet download link. End the video cleanly within 15 seconds of the final call to action.
Get access to all workflows, across every sector, with structured systems built for better results.