AI-Powered Ad Copy Generation System for Google Ads & Yandex.Direct

We design and deploy artificial intelligence systems: from prototype to production-ready solutions. Our team combines expertise in machine learning, data engineering and MLOps to make AI work not in the lab, but in real business.
Showing 1 of 1All 1564 services
AI-Powered Ad Copy Generation System for Google Ads & Yandex.Direct
Medium
~3-5 days
Frequently Asked Questions

AI Development Areas

AI Solution Development Stages

Latest works

  • image_website-b2b-advance_0.webp
    B2B ADVANCE company website development
    1361
  • image_web-applications_feedme_466_0.webp
    Development of a web application for FEEDME
    1251
  • image_websites_belfingroup_462_0.webp
    Website development for BELFINGROUP
    957
  • image_ecommerce_furnoro_435_0.webp
    Development of an online store for the company FURNORO
    1189
  • image_logo-advance_0.webp
    B2B Advance company logo design
    646
  • image_crm_enviok_479_0.webp
    Development of a web application for Enviok
    929

Development of an AI-Powered Ad Copy Generation System

Imagine launching a campaign on Yandex.Direct and Google Ads simultaneously. Manually writing 100+ unique ads while respecting character limits and brand tone—that's a week of routine. And even then, 4 out of 5 variants fail to deliver the expected CTR. We've been through this with dozens of clients and built a system on GPT-4o that generates hundreds of variants in minutes, accounting for each platform's constraints. Turnkey—from audit to integration with ad accounts.

Typical Problems the System Solves

Problem #1: Platform limits. Yandex.Direct cuts headlines after 35 characters, Google Ads after 30. Manual adjustment eats hours, and the result still suffers. We hardcode these rules directly into the prompt: the model "knows" the maximums and generates texts strictly within bounds.

Problem #2: Bloated A/B test budget. A copywriter produces 10 variants per day—too few for statistical significance. Our system outputs 100+ variants per minute, which is 14,400x faster (100/min vs 10/day), allowing you to test 50+ combinations in an hour and quickly find the winner.

Problem #3: Loss of brand tone. Without fine-tuning, the model easily generates generic phrases. We add a slot for brand tone and use RAG to pull context from your past campaigns.

How the System Ensures Platform Constraint Compliance

Each platform dictates rigid limits: headline length, description character count, available CTAs. We hardcode these rules directly into the prompt—the model "knows" that for Yandex.Direct the headline max is 35 characters, for Google Ads it's 30. No truncated phrases, no manual rework.

from openai import AsyncOpenAI
from dataclasses import dataclass

client = AsyncOpenAI()

@dataclass
class AdBrief:
    product: str
    usp: str              # unique selling proposition
    target_audience: str
    pain_points: list[str]
    platform: str         # google_search, yandex_direct, vk, telegram, instagram
    goal: str             # clicks, conversions, awareness, app_install
    brand_tone: str = "professional"

PLATFORM_CONSTRAINTS = {
    "google_search": {
        "headline_max": 30,
        "headline_count": 15,
        "description_max": 90,
        "description_count": 4
    },
    "yandex_direct": {
        "headline_max": 35,
        "headline_count": 8,
        "description_max": 81,
        "description_count": 2
    },
    "vk": {
        "headline_max": 50,
        "body_max": 220,
        "cta_options": ["Подробнее", "Купить", "Записаться", "Узнать больше", "Попробовать"]
    },
    "telegram": {
        "title_max": 50,
        "description_max": 160,
        "button_text_max": 25
    }
}

async def generate_ad_copy(
    brief: AdBrief,
    num_variants: int = 5
) -> list[dict]:
    constraints = PLATFORM_CONSTRAINTS.get(brief.platform, {})

    response = await client.chat.completions.create(
        model="gpt-4o",
        messages=[{
            "role": "system",
            "content": f"""You are a Performance Marketer, specialist in copywriting for {brief.platform}.
            Create {num_variants} ad copy variants.

            Platform constraints:
            {json.dumps(constraints, ensure_ascii=False)}

            Principles:
            - Specific over generic ("save 30 min/day" > "save time")
            - Benefit in headline, not feature
            - Triggers: urgency, social proof, FOMO
            - Clear CTA
            - No clichés: "best", "unique", "innovative"

            Return JSON array of variants."""
        }, {
            "role": "user",
            "content": f"""
            Product: {brief.product}
            USP: {brief.usp}
            Target audience: {brief.target_audience}
            Pain points: {', '.join(brief.pain_points)}
            Goal: {brief.goal}
            Tone: {brief.brand_tone}
            """
        }],
        response_format={"type": "json_object"}
    )

    return json.loads(response.choices[0].message.content)["variants"]

Why Use AI Generation Instead of a Copywriter?

Compare: a copywriter writes 10 variants per day, AI writes 100 per minute (14,400x faster). GPT-4o costs 5–10 times less and requires no revision cycles. API costs are as low as $0.01 per 1,000 tokens, saving up to $5,000 per month in copywriting expenses. But most importantly, it never tires and never forgets platform constraints. In one project, the system increased CTR by 35% by automatically A/B testing 40 headline variants. Let's assess your project—contact us, and we'll choose the optimal stack for your tasks.

Landing Page Section Generator

LANDING_SECTIONS = {
    "hero": "headline + subheadline + CTA button",
    "problem": "description of problem we solve",
    "solution": "how product solves the problem",
    "features": "3-5 key features with description",
    "social_proof": "testimonials, cases, numbers",
    "faq": "5-7 questions and answers",
    "cta": "final call to action"
}

async def generate_landing_copy(brief: AdBrief) -> dict:
    sections = {}
    for section_name, section_desc in LANDING_SECTIONS.items():
        response = await client.chat.completions.create(
            model="gpt-4o",
            messages=[{
                "role": "system",
                "content": f"Write a landing section: {section_desc}. No template phrases. Be specific and on point."
            }, {
                "role": "user",
                "content": f"Product: {brief.product}. USP: {brief.usp}. Target audience: {brief.target_audience}."
            }]
        )
        sections[section_name] = response.choices[0].message.content
    return sections

Platform Text Requirements

Platform Headline max Description max CTA button max
Google Ads 30 chars 90 chars
Yandex.Direct 35 chars 81 chars
VK 50 chars 220 chars 25 chars
Telegram 50 chars 160 chars 25 chars
Parameter Manual Copywriting AI System
Production speed 10–20 variants/day 100+ variants/minute
A/B testing 2–3 variants/week 50+ variants per hour
Format compliance Requires checking Automatic

How We Incorporate Brand Tone

To preserve your brand's unique voice, we fine-tune on your historical data—up to 1000 text examples. Adaptation is done via LoRA adapters, reducing cost to 5% of full fine-tuning. If data is scarce, we use RAG: the model pulls relevant snippets from your text library (emails, posts, landing pages). We also leverage few-shot learning and chain-of-thought reasoning to maintain consistency. This ensures generated text sounds like your brand, not an average copywriter.

Text Quality Scoring Module

To select the best variants before launch, we embed a scoring module based on GPT-4o. It analyzes each variant on five criteria: audience relevance, clarity, urgency, specificity, and CTA strength. Each criterion is scored 1–10. Based on the total, the model predicts CTR potential (low/medium/high). This filters out weak variants before they reach the ad account.

async def score_ad_copy(copy_variants: list[dict], brief: AdBrief) -> list[dict]:
    """Score each variant on key metrics"""
    response = await client.chat.completions.create(
        model="gpt-4o",
        messages=[{
            "role": "system",
            "content": f"""Score ad copies for {brief.platform}.
            Evaluation criteria (each 1-10):
            - relevance_to_audience
            - clarity
            - urgency
            - specificity
            - cta_strength

            Predict CTR potential: low/medium/high.
            Return JSON array of scores."""
        }, {
            "role": "user",
            "content": f"Variants:\n{json.dumps(copy_variants, ensure_ascii=False)}\n\nProduct: {brief.product}, Target audience: {brief.target_audience}"
        }],
        response_format={"type": "json_object"}
    )
    scores = json.loads(response.choices[0].message.content)["scores"]

    for i, variant in enumerate(copy_variants):
        if i < len(scores):
            variant["scores"] = scores[i]

    return copy_variants

What's Included in the Work

  1. Audit of current ad campaigns — briefs, tone, performance. We evaluate text volume, typical mistakes, and growth areas.
  2. Architecture design — model selection (GPT-4o/Claude 3.5), prompt engineering, brand context slot. Determine if fine-tuning or RAG is needed.
  3. Generator development — implement modules: platform-specific generation, landing pages, quality scoring. Write code in Python with async requests. We set temperature parameters and token limits to balance creativity and precision.
  4. Integration with ad accounts — connect to Google Ads API, Yandex.Direct API, Telegram Ads. Automatically upload texts on schedule.
  5. Testing and calibration — generate 500+ variants, measure CTR, adjust scoring weights. Iteratively improve quality.
  6. Deployment and documentation — deploy on your server or cloud, provide README, Swagger specification, train your team.

Timeline: basic module — from 1 week, full platform — up to 4 weeks. Contact us to evaluate your project — we'll pick the optimal stack and estimate cost within 1 day. Guaranteed stable operation and support at all stages.

Additionally, we leverage cutting-edge LLM techniques—fine-tuning on your historical data, RAG for brand context, and LoRA adapters for cost efficiency. Our team has 5+ years in machine learning and 20+ projects in ad automation. Order implementation and get a consultation on your project.

Generative AI Development: From Prompt to Production API

We often receive a task "generate a product image" — on the surface it seems simple. But behind this lies a choice between dozens of models, configuring the inference pipeline, manually solving consistency issues, integrating into the product backend, and answering why the model generates hands with six fingers in staging but not in production. Let's break down the directions we work with.

Image Generation: From Prompt to Production API

The current landscape includes FLUX.1 [dev/schnell/pro] from Black Forest Labs and Stable Diffusion 3.5. FLUX.1 [schnell] takes 4 steps instead of 20–50 for SDXL — 5–12 times faster — while maintaining higher quality. On an A100 80GB — 1.2–1.8 s per 1024×1024 image at batch_size=4.

A typical deployment issue: FLUX.1 [dev] requires 24+ GB VRAM in fp16. On A10G 24GB it fits tightly; at batch_size>1 — OOM. Solution: torch_dtype=torch.bfloat16 + enable_model_cpu_offload() from diffusers, or quantization via bitsandbytes to NF4 — minimal quality drop, memory consumption drops to 12–14 GB.

ControlNet and IP-Adapter are key tools for production tasks where controllability is needed. ControlNet with Canny/Depth/Pose maps provides structural control. IP-Adapter (especially IP-Adapter-FaceID) allows transferring character identity to generations — this is the foundation for personalized content. More about ControlNet can be found on Wikipedia.

Case study: e-commerce photography. A retailer with 8000 SKUs needed lifestyle photos for each product. Pipeline: product segmentation (Segment Anything Model 2) → background removal → inpainting with FLUX.1 [dev] using product image as IP-Adapter reference → upscale via RealESRGAN_x4plus. The generation cost is negligible compared to professional photography, providing huge savings. Throughput — 200 images/hour on 2× A100. Our extensive experience from 30+ projects ensures we select the optimal model for your task — an evaluation can be obtained upfront.

Why Is Model Selection Only Half the Battle?

Fine-tuning for a Specific Style or Character

Dreambooth and LoRA are the standard for adapting to a specific visual style or object. LoRA trains in 2–4 hours on 20–30 reference images on a single A100. Rank 16–32 is usually sufficient for style; rank 64+ is needed for precise face reproduction.

A common mistake: training LoRA too long — the model overfits to references, losing the ability to vary. Sign: at cfg_scale=7, all images look like copy-paste of references. Solved by early stopping (usually 1500–2000 steps for 20 images) and prior_preservation_loss.

For deeper customization — full fine-tuning via diffusers + accelerate with FSDP on multiple GPUs. But that already takes 40–80 hours of training and requires a truly large dataset (1000+ images).

Comparison of Image Generation Approaches

Model Speed (1024×1024, A100) Quality (CLIP score) Controllability (ControlNet, IP-Adapter) VRAM (fp16)
Stable Diffusion 3.5 2.0–3.5 s 0.28–0.31 via ControlNet (allowed) 16–20 GB
FLUX.1 [schnell] 0.8–1.2 s 0.30–0.33 limited (no ControlNet) 12–14 GB (4‑step)
FLUX.1 [dev] 3–5 s (50 steps) 0.32–0.34 via IP-Adapter, ControlNet (adapter) 24+ GB
Midjourney (API) 5–10 s (queue) 0.31–0.33 prompt + style reference not required

Video Generation: Which Models Are Best?

Model Availability Duration Resolution Controllability
Sora (OpenAI) API (limited) up to 60 s 1080p prompt, image-to-video
Wan2.1 (Alibaba) open weights up to 81 frames 720p prompt, I2V, V2V
CogVideoX-5B open weights 6 s 720p prompt, I2V
Kling 1.6 API up to 30 s 1080p prompt, I2V
Mochi-1 open weights 5.4 s 480p prompt

Open-weight video models still lag behind commercial ones in stability and length. Wan2.1 is the best choice for self-hosting: 14B parameters, runs on 2× A100, delivers acceptable quality for short clips.

The main pain of video generation is temporal consistency: the character changes clothing color at the third second, objects "drift." Partial solution — generation with motion_bucket_id and noise_aug_strength in Stable Video Diffusion, or using I2V (image-to-video) instead of pure text-to-video. As noted in VideoPoet research, consistency is achieved by training on long sequences.

AnimateDiff remains a working tool for short loops and motion effects on top of SD/FLUX. Not Sora, but deployable locally and predictable.

Music and Audio Generation

AudioCraft from Meta (MusicGen + AudioGen) is a production-ready stack for music generation. musicgen-large (3.3B) generates 30 s of music in ~8 s on A100. Control via text prompt and melody conditioning — you can specify a melody by humming.

Stable Audio Open from Stability AI is an alternative with length up to 47 s, better structural control (intro/verse/chorus). Deployment is similar: diffusers + FastAPI.

For voice-over and dubbing — ElevenLabs API or self-hosted XTTS v2 (see Speech AI service). For sound design and foley — AudioGen.

3D Generation: Current Practical State

3D generation has not yet reached the same maturity as 2D. But for specific tasks, tools are already working:

TripoSG and Shap-E — text/image-to-3D. Shap-E from OpenAI generates simple 3D meshes in seconds, but geometry is rough. TripoSG gives more detailed results but requires post-processing (remeshing, UV unwrapping).

Wonder3D and Zero123++ — 3D reconstruction from a single image. They work by generating multi-views (6–8 views) and then 3D reconstruction via NeuS or instant-ngp.

Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) — not generation, but reconstruction from a series of photos/videos. For product cards and real estate it's already production: 50–200 photos → 3DGS model in 15–30 min on RTX 4090 → interactive 3D viewer in browser.

What Infrastructure Is Needed for Generative AI Deployment?

Critical for generative models:

  • Task queue — Celery + Redis or Ray Serve. Synchronous HTTP for image generation is unacceptable with >5 concurrent requests.
  • Caching — similar prompts yield similar results. Semantic cache via embeddings (faiss + sentence-transformers) can reduce GPU load by 20–40%.
  • Quality monitoring — CLIP score for text-image alignment, FID for evaluating generation distribution. Integrate into MLflow or Weights & Biases.
  • Storage — generated images immediately to S3/MinIO, not on the inference server disk.

What's Included in the Deliverables

We take the project turnkey — from model selection to deployment and monitoring. The result includes:

  • Model (or API integration) with performance benchmarks (latency p99, throughput).
  • Pipeline documentation (prompt engineering guide, model card, dependency versions).
  • Integration with your backend (REST/gRPC, queues).
  • Configured monitoring (dashboards, alerts for quality drift).
  • Training workshop for the team (2–4 hours).
  • Warranty support for 3 months after launch — as part of our quality certificate.

We have completed 30+ projects in generative AI — this gives us the right to guarantee results.

How Is the Generative AI Development Process Structured?

  1. Analysis (1–2 days): audit of current architecture, clarification of use case, selection of models and success metrics. We evaluate the project free of charge.
  2. Proof of Concept (1–3 weeks): quick prototype on your data — to see real quality, not blog demos.
  3. Design (1–2 weeks): pipeline architecture, infrastructure (GPU cluster/API), A/B testing plan.
  4. Implementation and fine-tuning (4–12 weeks): development, LoRA/full fine-tuning, integration with queue and cache.
  5. Testing (1–2 weeks): load tests, metric validation, edge-case verification (negative scenarios).
  6. Deployment and monitoring (1–2 weeks): production deployment, monitoring setup, documentation.
What We Verify at the Proof of Concept Stage
  • Alignment of expectations and actual generation quality (CLIP score, user study).
  • Inference speed at different batch sizes and GPU types.
  • Likelihood of toxic/incorrect generations — checking safety filters.
  • Scalability: will the model handle peak load.

Timeline Estimates

Integration of a ready API (DALL·E 3, Midjourney API, Stability API) — 1–2 weeks. Self-hosted pipeline with fine-tuning — 6–12 weeks. Full platform with UI, queues and monitoring — 3–6 months. The specific cost is calculated individually after analyzing your scenario.

Contact us — order a consultation, and we will select the optimal architecture for your project. Get a preliminary cost and timeline estimate for free.