SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BA brand-voice

Develop or document a complete brand voice and tone system covering voice attributes, tone shifts by context, vocabulary preferences, grammar rules, and copy examples. Use this skill whenever the user wants to define how a brand sounds, write a voice and tone document, audit existing copy for voice consistency, train a team or AI assistant on brand voice, or refine the personality of brand writing. Triggers on brand voice, voice and tone, tone of voice, writing voice, brand personality, copy voice, voice document, voice guidelines, how should we write, voice training, voice audit. Also triggers when the user has copy that 'feels off' and the underlying issue is voice, even if not stated explicitly. On a voice consistency check, this skill owns defining and documenting the voice system; use `editorial-qa` when a specific draft needs checking against an existing system before it publishes.

rampstackco/claude-skills Agent Skills author: rampstackco 3 files body ≈ 1 961 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 9 h ago

Develop or document a complete brand voice and tone system covering voice attributes, tone shifts by context, vocabulary preferences, grammar rules, and copy…

As a process A 81/100 · Runs to the end — weak spots: progress reporting

ProcedureMarketingtype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
93/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
82
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
A
81/100
Runs to the end
Progress reporting w 2
0
Failures and branches w 10
50
Result and completion w 14
60
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: brand-voice (rampstackco/claude-skills)

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "catalog_summary"
    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "display_order"

    Process rating: all ten parameters 81/100

    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 65 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1961 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Description length 900: 120–800 characters recommended
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Structure: 13 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 65 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.