Voice and tone design
Skill event4u-app/agent-config/dist/agent-src/skills/voice-and-tone-design
Use when shaping brand voice — voice attributes, tone-by-context matrix, consistency review. Triggers on 'define our voice', 'why does our copy sound different on every surface'.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add event4u-app/agent-config --skill voice-and-tone-designAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 7 stars7 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
8.0 KB, ~1.8k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
voice-and-tone-design
When to use
- A team is producing copy across multiple surfaces and the same segment hears three different brands per quarter — name the voice so the surfaces converge.
- An audience-by-message matrix exists but each audience cell currently reads in a different tone, breaking the recognition signal across the segment.
- A new senior persona (CMO, founder, head-of-content) is asking for a voice-and-tone artefact that downstream writers can defend against.
Do NOT use to copy-edit individual assets (out of scope — that is a
writer's job), draft the message stack (route to
messaging-architecture), or pick channel-specific tactics like
subject lines or ad creative formats (channel-agnostic skill).
Cognition cluster
- Mental model 13 — Occam's Razor. The simplest voice the
segment can recognise across surfaces is the voice that survives
contact with three writers under deadline. A five-attribute voice
that no one remembers is brand-theatre. See
docs/contracts/mental-models.md§ 13. - Mental model 15 — Signal vs. noise. Voice is the
identification signal embedded in copy — without distinctiveness
it is noise that competes with every peer's noise. Cut to the
three attributes that only the segment hears as us. See
mental-models.md§ 15. - Context-spine — product + customer-segment. Read product
for the proofs the voice must carry (a voice that promises what
the product cannot back is fiction); read customer-segment
for the listening-register the audience already lives in. See
context-spine.
Procedure
Step 0: Inherit the positioning frame and audience matrix
Identify the locked positioning anchors from
positioning-strategy and the audience matrix
from messaging-architecture.
Voice without positioning is style; voice without an audience matrix
is broadcast.
Step 1: Analyze the inherited voice
Read 6–10 recent assets across the largest surface set the team ships on. For each, note the register (formal · conversational · technical · playful) and one line that sounds like us (or like anyone). The output is an honest audit: what voice is currently shipping, not what the team intends to ship.
Step 2: Pick three voice attributes — and three only
Three attributes, each phrased as "<we are> X, not Y." The not Y is non-trivial: it names the credible adjacent voice the team is choosing against, not a strawman. Examples of the shape (not vocabulary):
- "Precise, not pedantic."
- "Confident, not boastful."
- "Concrete, not buzzword."
A four-attribute voice will collapse to three under deadline; pick the three now.
Step 3: Build the tone-by-context matrix
Tone modulates voice; voice is constant. For each context — error copy, marketing surface, sales follow-up, onboarding, executive summary, support reply — fill: what the audience is feeling · what the surface must do · which voice attribute leads · what tone amplifier or muter applies. The matrix is the tool writers actually reach for; the three attributes are the spine they hang the tone on.
Step 4: Validate against the recognition signal
Validate the voice on three checks:
- Distinctiveness. Write the same sentence in three credible peer voices. Verify the team's voice is recognisable as distinct on first read — not on the second read after explaining the attributes.
- Proof-coverage. Confirm the voice does not promise what the product (from the spine) cannot back. "Calm" without an uptime story is fiction. Verify each attribute against a proof.
- Survives-deadline. Hand the artefacts to a writer who was not in the room. If the writer cannot reproduce the voice on a 30-minute draft, the voice is documented for the room, not the surface.
Step 5: Run the consistency review
Re-audit the assets from Step 1 against the locked attributes and tone matrix. Mark each line consistent · slipping · contradiction. Slipping is a writer-coaching problem; contradiction is a re-write. The review surfaces the load-bearing surfaces that need a re-pass, not a punitive list.
Step 6: Hand back
Hand the artefacts to writers across the surfaces, to
editorial-calendar for cadence
mapping, and to release-comms for
launch-surface voice review.
Related Skills
WHEN to use this
- The unit of work is the voice (three attributes + tone-by-context matrix), not a single line of copy.
- Surfaces are diverging in tone and the segment cannot recognise the brand across them.
- A team needs an artefact that a writer on deadline can actually use.
WHEN NOT to use this
- Drafting the message stack (primary message + proofs) — route to
messaging-architecture. - Cadence and content-debt management — route to
editorial-calendar. - Copy-editing individual assets — out of scope; that is a writer's craft.
- Launch-wave announcement copy — route to
release-comms.
When the agent should load this
- "Define our voice — three attributes, no more."
- "Mach uns einen Tone-by-Context matrix, der Schreibern auf Deadline hilft."
- "Why does our copy sound different on every surface?"
- "Run a voice consistency audit on last quarter's assets."
- "Pick the not-Y for each voice attribute."
Output
voice-attributes.md— three attributes in the "X, not Y" shape, with the proof-from-spine that backs each.tone-by-context.md— one row per surface context, with audience feeling, surface job, lead attribute, and tone amplifier / muter.consistency-review.md— audit of 6–10 recent assets, each line marked consistent · slipping · contradiction, with re-pass list ranked by surface load.
Gotcha
- A voice that pleases the room is usually below the noise floor — agreement is consensus, not distinctiveness.
- The not-Y is the work. "Confident, not boastful" is meaningful; "confident, not weak" is filler.
- Tone-by-context matrices over-amplify when the surface is high-stakes — a calm voice in error copy is the discipline, not the failure.
Do NOT
- Do NOT exceed three attributes — the fourth collapses on the first deadline.
- Do NOT prescribe channel-specific tactics or copywriting rules; tactics live with the channel owner.
- Do NOT promise voice attributes the product cannot back — "effortless" without an integration story is fiction the support queue will pay for.
Runnable example
Mid-market HR analytics tool, positioning locked (retention beats acquisition), audience matrix has HR director · CFO · IT-security:
- Voice attributes — "Precise, not pedantic." · "Confident, not boastful." · "Concrete, not buzzword."
- Tone-by-context — Error copy: audience scared, lead with precise, mute confident. Marketing surface: audience curious, lead with concrete, amplify confident. Onboarding: audience uncertain, lead with precise, amplify warmth modifier.
- Consistency review — 8 of 10 surveyed assets consistent; 1 slipping (CEO blog leans pedantic); 1 contradiction (homepage hero contradicts not buzzword with "synergistic"). Re-pass list: homepage hero (load-bearing surface, prioritised).
- Hand-off → writers across surfaces;
release-commsvoice-reviews the GA-wave announcement.
What ships with it: 1 file
755 B alongside SKILL.md
evals/
- evals.json755 B