🇺🇸English

Brand Review

If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.

Review marketing content against brand voice, style guidelines, and messaging standards. Flag deviations and provide specific improvement suggestions.

Trigger

User runs /brand-review or asks to review, check, or audit content against brand guidelines.

Inputs

1. Content to review — accept content in any of these forms:

   • Pasted directly into the conversation
   • A file path or ~~knowledge base reference (e.g. Notion page, shared doc)
   • A URL to a published page
   • Multiple pieces for batch review

2. Brand guidelines source (determined automatically):

   • If a brand style guide is configured in local settings, use it automatically
   • 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."

Review Process

With Brand Guidelines Configured

Evaluate the content against each of these dimensions:

Voice and Tone

• Does the content match the defined brand voice attributes?
• Is the tone appropriate for the content type and audience?
• Are there shifts in voice that feel inconsistent?
• Flag specific sentences or phrases that deviate with an explanation of why

Terminology and Language

• Are preferred brand terms used correctly?
• Are any "avoid" terms or phrases present?
• Is jargon level appropriate for the target audience?
• Are product names, feature names, and branded terms used correctly (capitalization, formatting)?

Messaging Pillars

• Does the content align with defined messaging pillars or value propositions?
• Are claims consistent with approved messaging?
• Is the content reinforcing or contradicting brand positioning?

Style Guide Compliance

• Grammar and punctuation per style guide (e.g., Oxford comma, title case vs. sentence case)
• Formatting conventions (headers, lists, emphasis)
• Number formatting, date formatting
• Acronym usage (defined on first use?)

Without Brand Guidelines (Generic Review)

Evaluate the content for:

Clarity

• Is the main message clear within the first paragraph?
• Are sentences concise and easy to understand?
• Is the structure logical and easy to follow?
• Are there ambiguous statements or unclear references?

Consistency

• Is the tone consistent throughout?
• Are terms used consistently (no switching between synonyms for the same concept)?
• Is formatting consistent (headers, lists, capitalization)?

Professionalism

• Is the content free of typos, grammatical errors, and awkward phrasing?
• Is the tone appropriate for the intended audience?
• Are claims supported or substantiated?

Legal and Compliance Flags (Always Checked)

Regardless of whether brand guidelines are configured, flag:

• Unsubstantiated claims — superlatives ("best", "fastest", "only") without evidence or qualification
• Missing disclaimers — financial claims, health claims, or guarantees that may need legal disclaimers
• Comparative claims — comparisons to competitors that could be challenged
• Regulatory language — content that may need compliance review (financial services, healthcare, etc.)
• Testimonial issues — quotes or endorsements without attribution or disclosure
• Copyright concerns — content that appears to be closely paraphrased from other sources

Brand Voice Reference

Use these frameworks to evaluate content against brand standards or to help the user document their brand voice.

Brand Voice Documentation Framework

A complete brand voice document should cover these areas:

1. 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."
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Core Messaging Pillars — 3-5 key themes the brand consistently communicates, the hierarchy of these messages, and how each pillar connects to audience needs.
5. Tone Spectrum — How the voice adapts across contexts while remaining recognizably the same brand.
6. Style Rules — Specific grammar, formatting, and language rules.
7. Terminology — Preferred and avoided terms.

Voice Attribute Spectrums

When defining or evaluating brand voice, position attributes on a spectrum:

For each chosen attribute, document it in this format:

[Attribute name]

• We are : [what this means in practice]
• We are not : [common misinterpretation to avoid]
• This sounds like : [example sentence demonstrating the attribute]
• This does NOT sound like : [example sentence violating the attribute]

Example:

Approachable

• We are : friendly, clear, jargon-free, welcoming to beginners and experts alike
• We are not : dumbed-down, overly casual, or lacking substance
• This sounds like : "Here's how to get started — it takes about five minutes."
• This does NOT sound like : "Yo! This is super easy, even a noob can do it lol."

Tone Adaptation Across Channels and Contexts

The brand voice stays consistent, but tone adapts to context. Tone is the emotional inflection applied to the voice.

Tone by Channel

Tone by Situation

Tone Adaptation Rule

The voice attributes remain fixed. Tone dials them up or down based on context. For example, if a brand is "bold and warm":

• In a product launch, dial up boldness
• In an incident response, dial up warmth
• Neither attribute disappears; the balance shifts

Style Guide Enforcement

Grammar and Mechanics

Document and enforce these choices consistently:

Formatting Conventions

• Heading hierarchy (when to use H1, H2, H3)
• Bold and italic usage (bold for emphasis, italic for titles/terms)
• Link text (descriptive vs. "click here" — always descriptive)
• Image alt text requirements
• Code formatting (for technical brands)
• Callout or highlight box usage

Punctuation and Emphasis

• Exclamation mark policy (limited use, never more than one)
• Ellipsis usage (avoid in most professional contexts)
• ALL CAPS policy (avoid; use bold for emphasis instead)
• Emoji usage by channel (professional channels: minimal or none; social: where appropriate)

Terminology Management

Preferred Terms

Maintain a list of preferred terms and their incorrect alternatives:

Product and Feature Names

• Official capitalization for product names
• When to use the full product name vs. shorthand
• Whether to use "the" before product names
• How to handle versioning in copy
• Trademark and registration symbols (when required and when to omit)

Inclusive Language

• Use gender-neutral language (they/them for unknown individuals)
• Avoid ableist language ("crazy", "blind spot", "lame")
• Use person-first language where appropriate
• Avoid culturally specific idioms that may not translate
• Use "simple" or "straightforward" instead of "easy" (what is easy varies by person)

Industry Jargon Management

• Define which technical terms the audience understands without explanation
• List jargon that should always be defined or replaced with plain language
• Specify which acronyms need to be spelled out on first use
• Audience-specific glossary for terms that mean different things to different readers

Competitor and Category Terms

• How to refer to your product category (use your preferred framing)
• How to refer to competitors (by name or generically)
• Terms competitors have coined that you should avoid (to prevent reinforcing their positioning)
• Your preferred differentiation language

Output Format

Present the review as:

Summary

• Overall assessment: how well the content aligns with brand standards (or general quality)
• 1-2 sentence summary of the biggest strengths
• 1-2 sentence summary of the most important improvements

Detailed Findings

For each issue found, provide:

Where severity is:

• High — contradicts brand voice, contains compliance risk, or significantly undermines messaging
• Medium — inconsistent with guidelines but not damaging
• Low — minor style or preference issue

Revised Sections

For the top 3-5 highest-severity issues, provide a before/after showing the original text and a suggested revision.

Legal/Compliance Flags

List any legal or compliance concerns separately with recommended actions.

After Review

Ask: "Would you like me to:

• Revise the full content with these suggestions applied?
• Focus on fixing just the high-severity issues?
• Review additional content against the same guidelines?
• Help you document your brand voice for future reviews?"

Weekly Installs

208

Repository

anthropics/know…-plugins

GitHub Stars

10.3K

First Seen

11 days ago

Security Audits

Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykWarn

Installed on

gemini-cli199

codex198

cursor198

opencode198

github-copilot197

kimi-cli197