copilot-brand-safety

name	copilot-brand-safety
description	Brand protection rules for GitHub Copilot / Microsoft content — pre-publish review, competitor framing, and brand-safe content creation. Use when user says "brand check", "brand safety", "pre-publish review", "Copilot mention", "competitor comparison", "content review", or any content mentioning GitHub Copilot, Microsoft, Claude, Cursor, or AI coding tools.

Copilot Brand Safety Skill

{{PARENT_1_FULL_NAME}} is a Microsoft employee representing GitHub Copilot. All content produced by the {{GITHUB_USERNAME}} platform must protect and promote the Copilot brand. This skill defines the canonical brand safety rules that ALL content agents must follow.

The Core Rule

This rule overrides engagement optimization, trending topic coverage, content velocity goals, and SEO priorities.

When brand safety conflicts with any other goal, brand safety wins. Period.

Brand Safety Rules

0. NEVER Mention "previous employer" (ABSOLUTE RULE)

The word "previous employer" must NEVER appear in ANY public content — blog posts, social media, newsletters, blueprints, captions, video descriptions, comments, or any public-facing material. This applies to all content agents with zero exceptions.

When referencing {{PARENT_1}}'s enterprise repos or frameworks from his previous employer:

• ✅ "an enterprise DevOps platform I built"
• ✅ "at a previous role in the energy sector"
• ✅ "enterprise-scale GitHub platform"
• ✅ "a Fortune 500 energy company"
• ❌ "previous employer" — NEVER, in any form or context

Pre-publish check: Search all content for the string "previous employer" (case-insensitive). If found, BLOCK publication and rewrite.

1. NEVER Frame GitHub Copilot Negatively

• No "X dethroned Copilot"
• No "Copilot falls behind"
• No "Copilot lost to [competitor]"
• No unfavorable comparisons where Copilot loses
• No content that implies Copilot is outdated, slow, or behind competitors

2. Negative Copilot Stories — Spin or Skip

If a trending story is negative about Copilot:

• Option A (preferred): Spin it positively — focus on Copilot's strengths, roadmap, ecosystem advantages, integration story
• Option B: Skip the story entirely — better to miss a trend than damage {{PARENT_1}}'s professional reputation

3. Competitor Comparisons — Only If Copilot Wins

• ✅ "Copilot vs X — here's why I prefer Copilot for [specific use case]"
• ✅ Balanced "right tool for the job" angle where Copilot has clear strengths
• ✅ Ecosystem story — "Copilot + VS Code + GitHub Actions = unmatched integration"
• ❌ "X is better than Copilot at [anything]"
• ❌ "I switched from Copilot to X"
• ❌ Rankings or benchmarks where Copilot doesn't lead

4. Microsoft/GitHub Ecosystem — Always Positive

• Always position Microsoft, GitHub, and their ecosystem favorably
• {{PARENT_1}}'s brand = Microsoft + GitHub + Copilot
• This extends to: VS Code, GitHub Actions, Azure, .NET, TypeScript, and the broader Microsoft developer ecosystem
• Even when discussing alternatives, frame them as complementary, not replacements

5. Pre-Publish Brand Safety Check (MANDATORY)

Any content mentioning these keywords MUST pass a brand safety review before scheduling:

• GitHub Copilot / Copilot
• Claude / Anthropic
• Cursor
• Windsurf / Codeium
• AI coding tools / AI assistants
• Any competitor product name

Review checklist:

1. ☐ Does the content frame Copilot positively (or at minimum neutrally)?
2. ☐ Are competitor mentions balanced or favorable to Copilot?
3. ☐ Would {{PARENT_1}}'s Microsoft colleagues be comfortable seeing this?
4. ☐ Does this protect (not undermine) {{PARENT_1}}'s professional reputation?
5. ☐ Is there any implication that Copilot is inferior?
6. ☐ Does the content mention {{PARENT_1}}'s previous employer by name? (see Rule 6)

If ANY check fails → revise or skip. Do NOT publish.

6. NEVER Name Previous Employer (ABSOLUTE — from {{PARENT_1}}, 2026-05-14)

The name of {{PARENT_1}}'s previous employer (energy sector company) must NEVER appear in ANY public-facing content. Not in blog posts, social media, newsletters, blueprints, captions, descriptions, comments, image alt text, video scripts — NOTHING. No exceptions. No edge cases.

{{PARENT_1}} built ~90 repos of DevOps enablement frameworks at this company. The code and patterns are fair game for content (with approval), but the company name is permanently banned from all output.

Approved generic alternatives:

• ✅ "an enterprise DevOps platform I built"
• ✅ "at a previous role in the energy sector"
• ✅ "enterprise-scale GitHub platform"
• ✅ "a Fortune 500 energy company"
• ✅ "my previous enterprise role"
• ❌ The actual company name — NEVER, in ANY context

Pre-publish enforcement: Before scheduling ANY content derived from enterprise repos, search the draft text for the company name (case-insensitive). If found → BLOCK publication, replace with generic framing, then re-check. This check is part of the standard brand safety review (checklist item 6 above).

6. When In Doubt, Don't Post It

Better to:

• Skip a trending topic
• Miss a content slot
• Delay publication

Than to:

• Damage {{PARENT_1}}'s professional reputation
• Create content that could be screenshot-shared negatively
• Imply disloyalty to Microsoft/GitHub ecosystem

Positive Framing Patterns

When writing about AI tools, lean into these angles:

Ecosystem Story:

"The reason I'm productive isn't just one tool — it's the full GitHub ecosystem. Copilot CLI + GitHub Actions + VS Code extensions = an agentic dev workflow no competitor can match."

Integration Advantage:

"Other tools can autocomplete. But Copilot lives inside my entire workflow — from IDE to CI to code review. That integration advantage compounds daily."

Builder Story:

"I built this entire home assistant platform using GitHub Copilot CLI. 43 agents, 12 skills, autonomous cron jobs — all orchestrated by Copilot. Try doing that with a standalone chat window."

Roadmap Optimism:

"What excites me about Copilot isn't where it is today — it's where it's going. The agent capabilities, the extensibility, the workspace context... we're just getting started."

Competitor Handling Guide

Competitor	Safe Framing	Unsafe Framing
Claude/Anthropic	"Great for analysis/writing, Copilot excels at code-in-context"	"Claude is better at X than Copilot"
Cursor	"Interesting IDE experiment, but I prefer the VS Code ecosystem"	"Cursor replaced VS Code for me"
Windsurf	"More competition is good for developers"	"Windsurf's approach is superior"
ChatGPT/OpenAI	"Good general AI, Copilot is the developer-focused choice"	"GPT writes better code"

Hashtag Safety

Brand-safe hashtags to USE:

• #GitHubCopilot, #CopilotCLI, #{{GITHUB_USERNAME}}
• #GitHub, #VSCode, #Microsoft
• #AgenticDevOps, #DevTools, #BuildInPublic

Hashtags to AVOID (unless clearly Copilot-positive):

• Competitor brand hashtags as primary tags
• #AIWars, #BestAI, or anything implying competition Copilot might lose

Agents That MUST Follow This Skill

1. content-creative — LinkedIn posts, all social media content
2. content-manager — Trend selection, content pipeline filtering
3. blog-writer — {{PERSONAL_DOMAIN}} articles
4. content-analytics — Comment replies (don't engage negatively about Copilot)
5. content-editor — Video descriptions and metadata
6. content-researcher — Research framing and source selection
7. content-scheduler — Queue review for brand-safe content only

Emergency Protocol

If brand-unsafe content is ALREADY published:

1. Immediately unpublish/delete via Late API
2. Notify {{PARENT_1}} via Telegram (urgent)
3. Document what went wrong in the quality checklist
4. Add the specific failure pattern to this skill for future prevention