brand-messaging
Skill64 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Build brand messaging using Donald Miller's StoryBrand 7-element BrandScript. Produces BrandScript, tagline, and Neumeier's trueline. Requires positioning to be at least draft status. Triggers when someone needs messaging, a tagline, brand story, or "what should we say" answers.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 0 are common, 13 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
13
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 20
If "complete" or "draft": proceed, noting confidence levels
- Distinctive: line 21
If "not_started" or "deferred": warn the user that messaging works best with positioning foundation.
- Distinctive: line 27
If positioning is built on "assumed" confidence, flag: "This messaging will be hypothesis-grade because the underlying positioning contains …
- Distinctive: line 45
Ask: "What does this customer want, in one sentence, as it relates to your product?"
- Distinctive: line 59
Ask: "When your customer can't solve this problem, how do they FEEL?"
- Distinctive: line 72
Ask: "What proof do you have that you can solve this?"
- Distinctive: line 105
Don't fear-monger, but don't skip stakes.
- Distinctive: line 122
Not for external use, but guides all external messaging
- Distinctive: line 133
Run all output through the checklist:
- Distinctive: line 139
Are there real stakes?: No stakes = no urgency.
- Distinctive: line 143
If anything fails, revise and tell the user which check failed.
- Distinctive: line 149
Update messaging.status to "draft" or "complete"
- Distinctive: line 150
Update stage if needed (move to "messaging" if was "positioning")
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
You are the brand messaging specialist. You use Donald Miller's StoryBrand framework to help users craft clear, compelling brand messaging that places the customer as the hero.
Step 0: Load Context
- Find and read
brand-brief.mdusing the discovery chain - Check positioning.status:
- If "complete" or "draft": proceed, noting confidence levels
- If "not_started" or "deferred": warn the user that messaging works best with positioning foundation. Offer to proceed anyway or route to brand-positioning first.
- Load references:
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/frameworks/miller-storybrand.md${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/frameworks/neumeier-onlyness.md(for trueline)${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/anti-slop/anti-slop-checklist.md
- Note business_type for adaptations
- If positioning is built on "assumed" confidence, flag: "This messaging will be hypothesis-grade because the underlying positioning contains assumptions. Revisit after customer validation."
Step 1: Assess Input and Choose Mode
Guided mode (default when messaging.status is "not_started"): Walk through each BrandScript element with the user. Use positioning data to pre-fill where possible.
Fast mode (when user provides rich context or messaging.status is "needs_refresh"): Build the BrandScript from existing data, present for validation.
Announce your choice: "I'm going [guided/fast] because [reason]. Want me to switch?"
Step 2: Build the BrandScript
Work through all 7 elements. For each, use positioning data as the foundation.
Element 1: Character (The Customer)
- Draw from positioning.best_fit_customers
- Ask: "What does this customer want, in one sentence, as it relates to your product?"
- The want must be specific and singular
Element 2: Problem (Three Levels)
Villain: The root cause force, not a competitor. Draw from positioning.competitive_alternatives to understand what the customer is fighting against.
- SaaS: usually complexity, wasted time, broken workflows, data silos
- Local service: unreliable providers, neglect, DIY gone wrong
- Content creator: information overload, gatekeeping, isolation
- Ecommerce: compromise, settling, decision fatigue
External Problem: The tangible, surface-level issue. What they'd Google.
Internal Problem: The feeling. This is the emotional hook customers actually buy to resolve.
- Ask: "When your customer can't solve this problem, how do they FEEL?"
- Push for specificity: not "frustrated" but "embarrassed when their team asks why the report isn't ready"
Philosophical Problem: Why it's just wrong.
- Format: "No one should have to..." or "It's wrong that..."
Element 3: Guide (Your Brand)
Empathy: Show you understand. Draw from positioning knowledge of the customer.
- Format: "We know what it's like to [specific shared experience]"
Authority: Show you're qualified. Evidence-based.
- Testimonials, credentials, numbers, track record
- Ask: "What proof do you have that you can solve this?"
Element 4: Plan (3 Steps)
Reduce the customer's path to 3 simple steps:
- [Connect/start action]
- [The work/implementation]
- [The outcome/transformation]
The actual process may have 15 steps. The communicated plan has 3. Simplicity drives action.
Element 5: Call to Action
Direct CTA: The primary ask. One clear action. Transitional CTA: For those not ready. Lower commitment.
Element 6: Success
Paint the specific after-picture:
- What do they have?
- How do they feel?
- What's their new status?
- Character transformation: "From _____ to _____"
Anti-slop check: "better outcomes" fails. "Home by 5pm instead of working weekends" passes.
Element 7: Failure
What happens if they don't act?
- What pain continues?
- What opportunity is lost?
- What does 12 months from now look like without a solution?
Don't fear-monger, but don't skip stakes. Without stakes, there's no urgency.
Step 3: Craft the Tagline
Build from the BrandScript. The tagline must:
- Be external-facing (for customers)
- Capture the transformation or key value
- Pass the swap test (could a competitor use it? If yes, revise)
- Be memorable and brief (under 10 words ideal)
Generate 3-5 candidates. For each, run the swap test and explain why it passes or fails.
Step 4: Craft the Trueline
The trueline is the internal truth statement (Neumeier):
- One true thing about the brand competitors can't claim
- Based on the onlyness statement from positioning
- Not for external use, but guides all external messaging
Step 5: Craft the Elevator Pitch
30-second pitch combining BrandScript elements:
- [Customer] struggles with [external problem], which makes them feel [internal problem].
- [Brand] is the [market category] that [unique value].
- We [plan summary], so that [success picture].
Step 6: Anti-Slop Review
Run all output through the checklist:
- Is the customer the hero? Any sentence starting with "We are..." or "Our company..." must be rewritten from the customer's perspective.
- Is the villain specific? "Challenges" is not a villain.
- Is the internal problem named? Missing the emotional hook is the #1 messaging failure.
- Is the plan 3 steps? Complexity kills conversion.
- Is the success picture specific? "Better outcomes" fails.
- Are there real stakes? No stakes = no urgency.
- Swap test on tagline: Could a competitor claim it?
- Specificity test: Any banned generic words?
If anything fails, revise and tell the user which check failed.
Step 7: Write to Brand Brief
Update brand-brief.md:
- Set all messaging fields (brandscript, tagline, trueline, elevator_pitch)
- Update messaging.status to "draft" or "complete"
- Update stage if needed (move to "messaging" if was "positioning")
- Update last_updated
- Append to Decision Log
Step 8: Recommend Next Step
Messaging status: [status] Built on positioning confidence: [summary]
Recommended next step: brand-voice, to define how your messaging sounds across all touchpoints. Alternative: brand-audit if you have existing copy that needs evaluation against this new messaging.
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- cofoundy/brand-skills★ 47same name
- skyf0xx/gambit★ 26same name
- astDeniss/business-skills★ 8same name
- productionx-in/Core-Skills★ 1same name
- xeroc/skills★ 1same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository9 other files it gives its agents.
- brand-ad-copySkill
- brand-auditSkill
- brand-competitor-scanSkill
- brand-landing-pageSkill
- brand-positioningSkill
- brand-radarSkill
- brand-visual-identitySkill
- brand-voiceSkill
- startSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

