| name | brand-voice |
| description | Define, document, and enforce a brand voice — voice attributes, tone adaptation by context, style/terminology rules — and review drafts against it. Use to create a brand voice guide, set tone-of-voice, or check whether content is on-brand. |
| compatibility | Designed for Vellum personal assistants — part of the marketing-expert plugin |
| metadata | {"emoji":"🎨","vellum":{"category":"marketing","display-name":"Brand Voice","activation-hints":["define / document our brand voice or tone of voice","is this on-brand? review this against our voice","make this sound more like us / our brand","create a style guide or messaging guidelines","what words should we use / avoid"]}} |
Establish a brand voice and keep content consistent with it. Two modes: define (build the voice guide) and review (check a draft against it). Pairs with draft-content (apply the voice while writing).
Define mode
Step 1: Source the voice
If a voice guide exists, load it. Otherwise derive one from inputs: positioning (run positioning-sprint if unclear), the audience, and 3–5 samples of content the user feels is "us." Note the founder's/exec's natural voice if relevant.
Step 2: Produce the voice guide
- 3–5 voice attributes — each as "we are X, not Y" (e.g. "Direct, not blunt"; "Confident, not boastful"), each with a one-line do/don't and a short example.
- Tone adaptation — how the voice flexes by context (sales page vs. docs vs. apology vs. social).
- Style rules — person (first/second), formality, sentence length, emoji/exclamation policy, formatting habits.
- Terminology — preferred terms, banned/avoid words, capitalization, how to name the product and competitors.
Save this as a reusable guide (e.g. a
BRAND.md in the workspace) so future content can reference it.
Review mode
Step 3: Check a draft against the voice
For the supplied content, score each voice attribute (on-brand / drifting / off), flag specific lines that break style or terminology rules, and rewrite the worst offenders inline. Keep edits surgical — preserve the author's intent.
Step 4: Summarize
Give a short verdict (ship / light edits / rework), the top 3 fixes, and — if patterns recur — a rule to add to the guide so it doesn't happen again.
Consistency is the point: a recognizable voice compounds trust. Be specific; "more friendly" is useless feedback, "cut the hedging in the opening line" is not.
