Review brand
Internal brand & copy review pass of the agentic-workflow review pack — composed in-turn by review-change and product-audit; not a menu entry. Checks changed user-facing copy against the project's brand doc: voice, terminology, and honesty of claims — applies only to surfaces with user-facing text. Findings only; never edits code.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill review-brandAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 19 stars19 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.
What its file declares
Copied from the file, not written here
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
2.5 KB, 490 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Review Brand & Copy (internal)
Composed by review-change / product-audit within their conversation — on any
agent, follow this file inline as the routed step. Findings only; never edits,
never refactors.
Scope
The diff or path/glob the caller passes; default the current change vs the default branch. State the scope at the top of the returned table.
Checklist (evaluate EVERY item — none is optional; n/a must be stated)
- ✓ Read the project's brand doc first (e.g.
docs/brand/BRAND.md) — cite the rule for every finding; n/a all items if the project has none and say so - ✓ Tone of changed copy matches the declared voice (cite the guideline violated)
- ✓ Product/domain terms used consistently with the declared glossary (same concept, same word, same capitalization)
- ✓ No forbidden/deprecated phrases from the brand doc
- ✓ Claims are honest: limits, restrictions, and reductions the code enforces are disclosed in the copy (an undisclosed limitation is a major finding — repo hard rule)
- ✓ Error/empty-state copy is actionable (says what happened and what to do), not blame-y
- ✓ Consistency across the changed surface and its siblings (same action labeled the same way everywhere)
- ✓ Placeholder/lorem text absent from the diff
Return exactly
REVIEW BRAND — scope: <scope>
| # | Finding | Sev | Evidence | Suggested fix |
|---|---------|-----|----------|---------------|
| 1 | <what> | critical|major|minor | <file:line> | <smallest action> |
Checklist: <n> evaluated, <n> pass, <n> findings, <n> n/a (<which + why>)
Summary: <1-2 sentences>
Decision: PASS | FAIL
FAIL if any critical or major finding is open; PASS otherwise. Minor findings never block — they route to the caller's triage step.
Done when
- Every checklist item was evaluated with evidence (file:line or command output) or explicitly marked n/a with the reason.
- The fixed-format block above is returned — nothing more, nothing less — and no code was changed.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.
Gives 1 of the 12 instructions most review quality skills give in 490 tokens
Counted across 1,273 of the 2,403 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-09-06
- Ask one question at a timein 63 of 1273, across 62 files
- Provide a recommended answer for each questionin 47 of 1273, across 45 files
- Rank findings by severityin 44 of 1273
- Use parameterized queries for database accessin 38 of 1273, across 20 files
- Validate all user input with schemasin 33 of 1273, across 15 files
- Store secrets in environment variablesin 32 of 1273, across 14 files
- Explore the codebase to answer questionsin 31 of 1273, across 29 files
- Store tokens in httpOnly cookiesin 30 of 1273, across 12 files
- Implement rate limiting on API endpointsin 30 of 1273, across 12 files
- Sanitize user-provided HTMLin 29 of 1273, across 11 files
- Return generic error messages to usersin 28 of 1273, across 10 files
- Cite file and line for every findinghere, and in 28 of 1273, across 25 files
Said here and by no other author read
- Read the project brand document first
- Verify tone matches the declared voice
- Use terms consistent with the glossary
- Disclose all code limitations in copy
- Ensure error copy is actionable
- Maintain consistency across changed surfaces
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.