The words that sell everywhere else get you suppressed here.

Ask almost anybody to make a product listing more persuasive and you get the same handful of words back: best, premium, guaranteed, amazing, top rated. On most platforms those are merely empty. On Amazon they are a restricted-claims problem — unsubstantiated superlatives are exactly what the listing rules prohibit, and the penalty is not a lower position but a suppressed listing. Live, paid for, and not shown to anyone. A listing that is being ignored can at least be improved. A listing that is suppressed sells nothing at all until you work out why.

Which makes an enthusiastic rewrite the wrong instrument for this particular job. This one goes the other way: it takes the claim out and asks what fact was underneath it. "Keeps drinks cold all day" is not a fact — a number of hours is, and only if somebody actually tested it. Anything it cannot trace back to something you supplied comes back as [ADD FACT] naming the specific missing thing, rather than as a smoother sentence.

Five bullets, five different facts

The bullets are where this usually shows. Five slots, and a weak listing fills all five with five ways of saying the product is good. Every one of them was a place a buyer's question could have been answered — the capacity, the material, what it fits, whether it survives a dishwasher, what is actually in the box — and a place the search index had something to match against. So a bullet that repeats another bullet is scored as a wasted slot, in the same way as a backend search term that copies a word already visible in the title: that field has been indexed once already, and spending it twice buys nothing at all.

What a fix looks like

Every superlative went, and not one of them was replaced by a better superlative. What replaced them was five separate answers to five separate questions — three the seller can supply in a minute, two they may have to go and check. The listing came out less exciting and considerably harder to argue with.