{
  "schema": "https://ai-atoms.com/schemas/skill-v1.json",
  "type": "skill",
  "id": "skill/brand-review",
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "name": "brand-review",
  "description": "Review content against your brand voice, style guide, and messaging pillars, flagging deviations by severity with specific before/after fixes. Use when checking a draft before it ships, when auditing copy for voice consistency and terminology, or when screening for unsubstantiated claims, missing disclaimers, and other legal flags.",
  "system_prompt_fragment": "# Brand Review\n\n> If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see [CONNECTORS.md](../../CONNECTORS.md).\n\nReview marketing content against brand voice, style guidelines, and messaging standards. Flag deviations and provide specific improvement suggestions.\n\n## Trigger\n\nUser runs `/brand-review` or asks to review, check, or audit content against brand guidelines.\n\n## Inputs\n\n1. **Content to review** — accept content in any of these forms:\n   - Pasted directly into the conversation\n   - A file path or ~~knowledge base reference (e.g. Notion page, shared doc)\n   - A URL to a published page\n   - Multiple pieces for batch review\n\n2. **Brand guidelines source** (determined automatically):\n   - If a brand style guide is configured in local settings, use it automatically\n   - If not configured, ask: \"Do you have a brand style guide or voice guidelines I should review against? You can paste them, share a file, or describe your brand voice. Otherwise, I'll do a general review for clarity, consistency, and professionalism.\"\n\n## Review Process\n\n### With Brand Guidelines Configured\n\nEvaluate the content against each of these dimensions:\n\n#### Voice and Tone\n- Does the content match the defined brand voice attributes?\n- Is the tone appropriate for the content type and audience?\n- Are there shifts in voice that feel inconsistent?\n- Flag specific sentences or phrases that deviate with an explanation of why\n\n#### Terminology and Language\n- Are preferred brand terms used correctly?\n- Are any \"avoid\" terms or phrases present?\n- Is jargon level appropriate for the target audience?\n- Are product names, feature names, and branded terms used correctly (capitalization, formatting)?\n\n#### Messaging Pillars\n- Does the content align with defined messaging pillars or value propositions?\n- Are claims consistent with approved messaging?\n- Is the content reinforcing or contradicting brand positioning?\n\n#### Style Guide Compliance\n- Grammar and punctuation per style guide (e.g., Oxford comma, title case vs. sentence case)\n- Formatting conventions (headers, lists, emphasis)\n- Number formatting, date formatting\n- Acronym usage (defined on first use?)\n\n### Without Brand Guidelines (Generic Review)\n\nEvaluate the content for:\n\n#### Clarity\n- Is the main message clear within the first paragraph?\n- Are sentences concise and easy to understand?\n- Is the structure logical and easy to follow?\n- Are there ambiguous statements or unclear references?\n\n#### Consistency\n- Is the tone consistent throughout?\n- Are terms used consistently (no switching between synonyms for the same concept)?\n- Is formatting consistent (headers, lists, capitalization)?\n\n#### Professionalism\n- Is the content free of typos, grammatical errors, and awkward phrasing?\n- Is the tone appropriate for the intended audience?\n- Are claims supported or substantiated?\n\n### Legal and Compliance Flags (Always Checked)\n\nRegardless of whether brand guidelines are configured, flag:\n- **Unsubstantiated claims** — superlatives (\"best\", \"fastest\", \"only\") without evidence or qualification\n- **Missing disclaimers** — financial claims, health claims, or guarantees that may need legal disclaimers\n- **Comparative claims** — comparisons to competitors that could be challenged\n- **Regulatory language** — content that may need compliance review (financial services, healthcare, etc.)\n- **Testimonial issues** — quotes or endorsements without attribution or disclosure\n- **Copyright concerns** — content that appears to be closely paraphrased from other sources\n\n## Brand Voice Reference\n\nUse these frameworks to evaluate content against brand standards or to help the user document their brand voice.\n\n### Brand Voice Documentation Framework\n\nA complete brand voice document should cover these areas:\n\n1. **Brand Personality** — Define the brand as if it were a person. Example: \"If our brand were a person, they would be a knowledgeable colleague who explains complex things simply, celebrates your wins genuinely, and never talks down to you.\"\n2. **Voice Attributes** — 3-5 attributes that define how the brand communicates, each defined with what it means in practice, what it does NOT mean (to prevent misinterpretation), and an example.\n3. **Audience Awareness** — Who the brand is speaking to (primary and secondary), what they care about, their level of expertise, and how they expect to be addressed.\n4. **Core Messaging Pillars** — 3-5 key themes the brand consistently communicates, the hierarchy of these messages, and how each pillar connects to audience needs.\n5. **Tone Spectrum** — How the voice adapts across contexts while remaining recognizably the same brand.\n6. **Style Rules** — Specific grammar, formatting, and language rules.\n7. **Terminology** — Preferred and avoided terms.\n\n### Voice Attribute Spectrums\n\nWhen defining or evaluating brand voice, position attributes on a spectrum:\n\n| Spectrum | One End | Other End |\n|----------|---------|-----------|\n| Formality | Formal, institutional | Casual, conversational |\n| Authority | Expert, authoritative | Peer-level, collaborative |\n| Emotion | Warm, empathetic | Direct, matter-of-fact |\n| Complexity | Technical, precise | Simple, accessible |\n| Energy | Bold, energetic | Calm, measured |\n| Humor | Playful, witty | Serious, earnest |\n| Innovation | Cutting-edge, forward-looking | Established, proven |\n\nFor each chosen attribute, document it in this format:\n\n**[Attribute name]**\n- **We are**: [what this means in practice]\n- **We are not**: [common misinterpretation to avoid]\n- **This sounds like**: [example sentence demonstrating the attribute]\n- **This does NOT sound like**: [example sentence violating the attribute]\n\nExample:\n\n**Approachable**\n- **We are**: friendly, clear, jargon-free, welcoming to beginners and experts alike\n- **We are not**: dumbed-down, overly casual, or lacking substance\n- **This sounds like**: \"Here's how to get started — it takes about five minutes.\"\n- **This does NOT sound like**: \"Yo! This is super easy, even a noob can do it lol.\"\n\n### Tone Adaptation Across Channels and Contexts\n\nThe brand voice stays consistent, but tone adapts to context. Tone is the emotional inflection applied to the voice.\n\n#### Tone by Channel\n\n| Channel | Tone Adaptation | Example |\n|---------|----------------|---------|\n| Blog | Informative, conversational, educational | \"Let's walk through how this works and why it matters for your team.\" |\n| Social media (LinkedIn) | Professional, thought-provoking, concise | \"Three things we learned from running 50 campaigns this quarter.\" |\n| Social media (Twitter/X) | Punchy, direct, sometimes witty | \"Your landing page has 3 seconds. Make them count.\" |\n| Email marketing | Personal, helpful, action-oriented | \"We put together something we think you'll find useful.\" |\n| Sales collateral | Confident, benefit-driven, specific | \"Teams using our platform reduce reporting time by 40%.\" |\n| Support/Help docs | Clear, patient, step-by-step | \"If you see this error, here's how to fix it.\" |\n| Press release | Formal, factual, newsworthy | \"The company today announced the launch of...\" |\n| Error messages | Empathetic, helpful, blame-free | \"Something went wrong on our end. We're looking into it.\" |\n\n#### Tone by Situation\n\n| Situation | Tone Adaptation |\n|-----------|----------------|\n| Product launch | Excited, confident, forward-looking |\n| Incident or outage | Transparent, empathetic, accountable |\n| Customer success story | Celebratory, specific, crediting the customer |\n| Thought leadership | Authoritative, nuanced, evidence-based |\n| Onboarding | Welcoming, encouraging, clear |\n| Bad news (price increase, deprecation) | Honest, respectful, solution-oriented |\n| Competitive comparison | Confident but fair, fact-based, not disparaging |\n\n#### Tone Adaptation Rule\nThe voice attributes remain fixed. Tone dials them up or down based on context. For example, if a brand is \"bold and warm\":\n- In a product launch, dial up boldness\n- In an incident response, dial up warmth\n- Neither attribute disappears; the balance shifts\n\n### Style Guide Enforcement\n\n#### Grammar and Mechanics\nDocument and enforce these choices consistently:\n\n| Rule | Options | Example |\n|------|---------|---------|\n| Oxford comma | Yes / No | \"fast, reliable, and secure\" vs. \"fast, reliable and secure\" |\n| Sentence case vs. title case (headings) | Sentence / Title | \"How to get started\" vs. \"How to Get Started\" |\n| Contractions | Use / Avoid | \"we're\" vs. \"we are\" |\n| Em dash spacing | No spaces / Spaces | \"this—and more\" vs. \"this — and more\" |\n| Numbers | Spell out 1-9, numerals 10+ / Always numerals | \"five features\" vs. \"5 features\" |\n| Percent | % / percent | \"50%\" vs. \"50 percent\" |\n| Date format | Month DD, YYYY / DD/MM/YYYY / etc. | \"January 15, 2025\" |\n| Time format | 12-hour / 24-hour | \"3:00 PM\" vs. \"15:00\" |\n| Lists | Periods / No periods on fragments | \"Set up your account.\" vs. \"Set up your account\" |\n\n#### Formatting Conventions\n- Heading hierarchy (when to use H1, H2, H3)\n- Bold and italic usage (bold for emphasis, italic for titles/terms)\n- Link text (descriptive vs. \"click here\" — always descriptive)\n- Image alt text requirements\n- Code formatting (for technical brands)\n- Callout or highlight box usage\n\n#### Punctuation and Emphasis\n- Exclamation mark policy (limited use, never more than one)\n- Ellipsis usage (avoid in most professional contexts)\n- ALL CAPS policy (avoid; use bold for emphasis instead)\n- Emoji usage by channel (professional channels: minimal or none; social: where appropriate)\n\n### Terminology Management\n\n#### Preferred Terms\n\nMaintain a list of preferred terms and their incorrect alternatives:\n\n| Use This | Not This | Notes |\n|----------|----------|-------|\n| sign up (verb) | signup (verb) | \"signup\" is the noun form |\n| log in (verb) | login (verb) | \"login\" is the noun/adjective form |\n| set up (verb) | setup (verb) | \"setup\" is the noun/adjective form |\n| email | e-mail | No hyphen |\n| website | web site | One word |\n| data is (singular) | data are | Unless the publication requires plural |\n\n#### Product and Feature Names\n- Official capitalization for product names\n- When to use the full product name vs. shorthand\n- Whether to use \"the\" before product names\n- How to handle versioning in copy\n- Trademark and registration symbols (when required and when to omit)\n\n#### Inclusive Language\n- Use gender-neutral language (they/them for unknown individuals)\n- Avoid ableist language (\"crazy\", \"blind spot\", \"lame\")\n- Use person-first language where appropriate\n- Avoid culturally specific idioms that may not translate\n- Use \"simple\" or \"straightforward\" instead of \"easy\" (what is easy varies by person)\n\n#### Industry Jargon Management\n- Define which technical terms the audience understands without explanation\n- List jargon that should always be defined or replaced with plain language\n- Specify which acronyms need to be spelled out on first use\n- Audience-specific glossary for terms that mean different things to different readers\n\n#### Competitor and Category Terms\n- How to refer to your product category (use your preferred framing)\n- How to refer to competitors (by name or generically)\n- Terms competitors have coined that you should avoid (to prevent reinforcing their positioning)\n- Your preferred differentiation language\n\n## Output Format\n\nPresent the review as:\n\n### Summary\n- Overall assessment: how well the content aligns with brand standards (or general quality)\n- 1-2 sentence summary of the biggest strengths\n- 1-2 sentence summary of the most important improvements\n\n### Detailed Findings\n\nFor each issue found, provide:\n\n| Issue | Location | Severity | Suggestion |\n|-------|----------|----------|------------|\n\nWhere severity is:\n- **High** — contradicts brand voice, contains compliance risk, or significantly undermines messaging\n- **Medium** — inconsistent with guidelines but not damaging\n- **Low** — minor style or preference issue\n\n### Revised Sections\n\nFor the top 3-5 highest-severity issues, provide a before/after showing the original text and a suggested revision.\n\n### Legal/Compliance Flags\n\nList any legal or compliance concerns separately with recommended actions.\n\n## After Review\n\nAsk: \"Would you like me to:\n- Revise the full content with these suggestions applied?\n- Focus on fixing just the high-severity issues?\n- Review additional content against the same guidelines?\n- Help you document your brand voice for future reviews?\"",
  "applicable_domains": [
    "marketing",
    "content"
  ],
  "invocation": [
    "/brand-review",
    "/brand-review <content to review>"
  ],
  "tags": [
    "marketing",
    "anthropics",
    "knowledge-work"
  ],
  "authored_by": "anthropics",
  "source_url": "https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/blob/main/marketing/skills/brand-review/SKILL.md",
  "lifecycle": "stable",
  "category": "marketing",
  "provenance": {
    "source": "anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins",
    "source_url": "https://github.com/anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins/blob/main/marketing/skills/brand-review/SKILL.md",
    "author": "Anthropic",
    "license": "Apache-2.0",
    "notes": "Imported by scripts/import-anthropic-skills.py."
  }
}