voice-tone-and-content-style-guide

name	voice-tone-and-content-style-guide
description	Use when defining or governing a product voice chart, tone map, terminology glossary, content style guide, or voice tiebreaker. Use ux-writing-and-microcopy for interface strings and error-empty-and-system-messaging for state-specific messages.
metadata	{"portable":true,"category":"10-content-design-and-ux-writing","compatible_with":["claude-code","codex"]}

Voice, Tone & Content Style Guide (the operational content-voice system)

A product's voice is the consistent, recognizable set of word-choice characteristics across the whole experience — what makes the copy legitimate, trustworthy, and unmistakably this product. Its tone is the variability of that voice from moment to moment: the same voice sounds different in a celebration than in a billing failure. This skill is where the voice is defined and ratified and where tone is mapped — the upstream content system the microcopy and error skills already cite as the missing dependency. It turns an intangible "brand personality" into per-principle, per-aspect, ratified decision rules.

This is a doctrine concern, not decoration. Per doctrine/design-doctrine.md §0–2, the moat is output that looks authored — and a ratified voice is exactly the "looks authored" mission applied to words: it gives every string a stated standard to be measured against, so the copy reads as the work of skilled human hands rather than the convergent machine mean. A product with no defined voice converges, by default, on slop.

Use When

• Defining a product's content voice from scratch — the personality, the lexicon, the word-choice characteristics that must hold across every screen.
• Building the Voice Chart: the six voice aspects (Concepts, Vocabulary, Verbosity, Grammar, Punctuation, Capitalization) crossed with the product's principles, with a ratified tiebreaker so the chart can settle disputes.
• Writing the Voice Guide in the "We are / We are not / Examples" form — and getting the "We are not" right (avoiding the three traps).
• Building a Tone Map: how the one voice flexes by magnitude (subtle → strong) across a single flow and across the user lifecycle (onboarding → habitual use → churn → resurrection).
• Settling the recurring stakeholder fight with the casual ≠ conversational ruling.
• Establishing terminology governance: one term per concept, the glossary, the banned/preferred lexicon, and who owns changes.
• Auditing whether existing copy is on-voice, or training/checking an LLM that drafts copy against the ratified voice.

Do Not Use When

• You need to detect generic, machine-written prose — the em-dash tell, "delve"-class diction, hedged transitions, list-of-three padding, "is this passage AI-generated?" That textual AI-slop detection lives in the digital-research engine's writing-slop skills, NOT here. The boundary is clean: this skill decides what the product's words should be and whether they are on-voice; the research engine decides whether a passage reads as machine-generated slop. Cross-reference; never duplicate. (Doctrine note, docs/book-study/03-ux-writing.md.)
• You are writing the actual interface strings — button/CTA labels, field labels, tooltips, confirmation copy → 10-…/ux-writing-and-microcopy (it consumes the voice this skill defines).
• You are writing error / empty / system messages → 10-…/error-empty-and-system-messaging (it applies this voice to the hardest moments).
• You are producing the visual + verbal brand identity deliverable for a client (logo rules, palette card, typography specimen, plus a voice section) → 02-color-brand-and-visual-identity/brand-style-guide. That is the brand-level artifact; this is the operational content voice/tone system for interface copy. They reference each other and must not duplicate: brand-style-guide owns the brand-identity framing; this skill owns the Voice Chart, Tone Map, and lexicon governance the writers operate from day to day.
• You are designing the visual empty/error/loading states → 04-…/empty-error-and-loading-states.

Required Inputs

Input	Source	Required?	Evidence
Product principles, audience, and positioning	Product and brand owners	yes	Ratified strategy or named provisional owner
Representative content and failure cases	Product surfaces and support evidence	yes	Corpus spanning routine and high-stakes moments
Legal, accessibility, and localisation constraints	Policy and regional owners	when applicable	Approved terminology and prohibited claims

• The product principles (2–4) the experience is designed around — these become the columns of the Voice Chart. If none are documented, derive a provisional set with the team before building the chart; the chart is meaningless without them.
• The brand personality / strategy input (from 02-…/brand-style-guide or brand-strategy): the adjectives, the audience, the positioning the voice must express.
• Sample real strings from the product (or close competitors) to test the voice against — a voice that can't be applied to actual copy is theatre.
• The ratification authority: who gets to settle a voice dispute, and by which mode (consensus / autonomous coin-flip / hierarchical-autocratic). The chart inherits the authority of whoever ratified it; without that, it cannot break ties.
• The user lifecycle stages and key flows the Tone Map must cover (onboarding, core use, failure/billing, churn, resurrection).

Workflow

1. Fix the columns: state the product principles first. The Voice Chart is principles × voice-aspects; the principles are the columns. Take the experience's 2–4 product principles (three is common, not magical) and write them across the top. Don't invent voice in a vacuum — voice is how the product expresses its principles in words. See references/voice-chart-and-tone-map.md §Voice Chart.

2. Fill the six voice rows against each column. For every principle, decide the rule on each of the six aspects of voice: Concepts (which ideas/metaphors we reach for), Vocabulary (the words we use and avoid), Verbosity (how much we say), Grammar (sentence shape, person, mood), Punctuation (what we use and ban — e.g. exclamation marks, em-dashes), Capitalization (sentence case vs title case vs lowercase). Write specific, applicable cells, not adjectives. Deliberate tensions between cells are a feature — they generate divergent drafting options under pressure. See references/voice-chart-and-tone-map.md.

3. Ratify the chart and record the tiebreaker. A Voice Chart's fourth and most important job is to break ties — but it can only do that with stated authority. Record, in the chart header: who ratified it and the decision mode (consensus / autonomous / hierarchical). Without a ratified tiebreaker the chart is a suggestion, not a standard; with one it ends the "which wording is more on-voice" argument by pointing to a cell. The chart then serves its four roles: (1) train new content designers, (2) inform/check LLM drafting, (3) design new text, (4) break ties.

4. Write the Voice Guide: "We are / We are not / Examples". Complement the chart with the leaner, classroom-ready Voice Guide (Ben-David). For each voice dimension: We are (the trait), We are not (the boundary), Examples (real strings). The hard part is "We are not" — it must avoid the three traps: (1) opposites/antonyms ("We are clear / we are not confusing" says nothing), (2) things no product wants ("we are not rude/sloppy" — nobody aims there), (3) irrelevancies (traits no one would mistake us for). A valid "We are not" is a trait another product would legitimately want, that a writer might land on by accident while aiming at ours — e.g. aiming "Approachable", accidentally landing "Best buds". See §Voice Guide & the three traps.

Decision Rules

Condition	Voice/tone choice	Wrong-choice failure
Trait must remain stable across contexts	Encode it in the voice chart	Tone guidance drifts by writer and screen
Emotional magnitude changes	Adjust tone, not the core voice	The product sounds like a different organisation
Clarity conflicts with personality	Choose clarity and document the limit	Cleverness delays or distorts action
Regulated or crisis moment	Use restrained, literal, accountable language	Humour or warmth trivialises harm and creates risk

Capability Contract

Read and search are required across product strategy, representative content, research, and policy. Editing is allowed only for authorised guide or content changes. Research, localisation, publication, and organisation-wide terminology changes require named authority and evidence.

Degraded Mode

If required evidence or tooling is unavailable, use the scoped fallback below and mark the result unverified. Without ratified principles or audience evidence, produce a clearly labelled provisional guide and decision log. Without regional or legal review, mark affected terminology unapproved and block claims that depend on it.

Anti-Patterns

• A voice "guide" that is just adjectives — "friendly, clear, human" with no per-aspect rule a writer can apply. The Voice Chart exists precisely to make voice operational, cell by cell.
• A chart with no ratified tiebreaker — then it can't do its most valuable job (settling disputes); it's a poster, not a standard. Always record who ratified it and how.
• "We are not" antonyms / strawmen / irrelevancies — "we are not confusing / rude / a tractor". The three traps. A real "We are not" names a legitimate adjacent trait a writer might hit by accident.
• A flat tone "matrix" with no magnitude — tone is direction and how far; "formal vs casual" cells miss that the same voice dials up and down. Map magnitude across flow and lifecycle.
• Confusing casual with conversational — sliding "be friendlier" into slang and jokes by default. Conversational is always right; casual is an explicit, principle-tied choice.
• No terminology owner — a glossary nobody governs drifts back to synonyms within a release.
• Defining voice with no product principles — the chart's columns are the principles; without them you're decorating, not deciding.
• Absorbing AI-prose detection — trying to make this skill judge whether text "reads as AI-written". That is the research engine's job; this skill judges on-voice, not machine-origin.
• A voice that can't be applied to a real string — theatre. Every rule must survive contact with an actual button, label, or error.

Outputs

Artefact	Consumer	Evidence and acceptance condition
Ratified voice chart and tiebreaker	Writers, designers, and reviewers	Each trait has operational examples and a named authority
Tone map and terminology glossary	Product content teams	Key journeys and magnitude changes are covered consistently
Governance and review record	Content owners	Change process, exceptions, and corpus checks are documented

• A ratified Voice Chart — six voice rows (Concepts, Vocabulary, Verbosity, Grammar, Punctuation, Capitalization) × the product-principle columns, with a header recording the ratification authority and tiebreaker mode.
• A Voice Guide in "We are / We are not (three-traps-clean) / Examples" form.
• A Tone Map — tone by magnitude across a key flow and across the user lifecycle, with named code-switch points.
• The casual ≠ conversational ruling for this product (stated, principle-tied).
• A terminology glossary + governance rule — one term per concept, preferred/banned lexicon, inclusive-language bans, and the owner/approval process.
• A short voice statement the downstream skills write against, and the updated seam pointer.

Examples

• examples/worked-voice-and-tone-guide.md — a complete worked content style guide for a sample product (Ledgerly, a small-business invoicing app): a filled Voice Chart (six rows × three ratified principles, with the tiebreaker recorded), a Voice Guide with three-traps-clean "We are not" lines, a Tone Map across the checkout flow and the user lifecycle, the casual≠conversational ruling, and a terminology glossary with governance. No placeholders — the calibration target.

References

• doctrine/design-doctrine.md — §0–2: a ratified voice is the "looks authored" mission applied to words; state the standard before producing; no convergent default copy. The voice exists so every string has an authored standard to meet.
• references/voice-chart-and-tone-map.md — the core method: the Voice Chart (six aspects × principles + the four roles + the ratified tiebreaker, Podmajersky), the Voice Guide with the "We are not" three traps (Ben-David), the voice-vs-tone distinction, the Tone Map (magnitude × flow × lifecycle, code-switching, Ben-David), casual ≠ conversational, and the terminology-governance pattern. Includes the boundary note (textual AI-slop → research engine).
• 10-content-design-and-ux-writing/ux-writing-and-microcopy — the downstream skill that consumes this voice for interface strings; update its voice-source pointer here.
• 10-content-design-and-ux-writing/error-empty-and-system-messaging — applies this voice to error/empty/system copy (where a voice is tested hardest); shares the inclusive-language bans.
• 02-color-brand-and-visual-identity/brand-style-guide — the brand-level visual+verbal identity deliverable; references this skill for the operational content voice/tone system, not duplicating it.
• Provenance (named, not in-repo): Podmajersky, Strategic Writing for UX 2nd ed. (Voice Chart, voice-vs-tone); Ben-David, The Fundamentals of UX Writing (Voice Guide three traps, Tone Maps, casual≠conversational). Distilled in docs/book-study/03-ux-writing.md.