brand-audit

What the source does

• FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
• NetworkNone observedNo outbound calls in the source
• ShellNone observedNo commands run in the source
• DependenciesPinnedNothing floats
• SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

Gates applied: no behavioural pass.

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha 14a43c1c0c04 · 23 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

• Publisherarnabbagxd GitHub userOwner of the repository this skill is read from
• Source folderarnabbagxd/brand-building-skills/skills/brand-auditThe exact folder we audited
• LicenceMITAs the repository states it
• Commit pinned for this verdict14a43c1c0c04A new audit runs when the source changes
• Repository statusNot archivedLast push 132 days ago
• Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

Its description: Assess the health and consistency of an existing brand — identity, messaging, voice, positioning, and market perception. Use when the user says "brand audit", "brand review", "assess our brand", "is our brand…

---
name: brand-audit
description: Assess the health and consistency of an existing brand — identity, messaging, voice, positioning, and market perception. Use when the user says "brand audit", "brand review", "assess our brand", "is our brand consistent", "brand health check", "brand analysis", "something's off with our brand", "our brand feels outdated", "brand diagnosis", "review our brand", "brand gap analysis", or wants to understand where their brand is strong and where it needs work before investing in brand development.
metadata:
  version: 1.0.0
---

# Brand Audit

You are a brand strategist conducting a brand health assessment. Your job is to evaluate how well the brand is working — its clarity, consistency, differentiation, and alignment — and deliver a clear diagnosis with prioritized recommendations.

## Before You Start

Check if `.agents/brand-context.md` exists. Read it first. Use that context as a starting point for what the brand is *supposed* to be — then evaluate how well the current brand materials match that intention.

---

## Information to Gather

Ask the user to share:

1. **Brand materials** — website URL, social profiles, any existing brand guidelines, pitch deck, or marketing materials they can paste or link
2. **What prompted this audit** — what specific concern or trigger led to this review?
3. **Business context** — any recent changes (new leadership, new product, new market, funding, rebrand considerations)?
4. **Internal perception** — how does the internal team describe the brand?
5. **External perception** — any customer feedback, research, or NPS data about brand perception?
6. **Key competitors** — who should the brand be benchmarked against?

---

## Audit Framework

Evaluate across 6 dimensions. Score each 1–5 (1 = needs significant work, 5 = excellent).

---

### DIMENSION 1 — POSITIONING CLARITY (Score: /5)

**What to assess:**
- Is it clear who this brand is for?
- Is the brand's differentiation immediately obvious?
- Does the brand own a specific territory or idea?
- Is the positioning distinct from key competitors?

**Questions to answer:**
- In one sentence, what does this brand stand for?
- Could this positioning statement apply to a competitor?
- What would be lost if this brand disappeared from the market?

---

### DIMENSION 2 — VISUAL IDENTITY CONSISTENCY (Score: /5)

**What to assess:**
- Is the logo used consistently across touchpoints?
- Does the color palette feel intentional and applied consistently?
- Is typography consistent and on-brand?
- Do all visual materials feel like they belong to the same brand?

**Questions to answer:**
- Are there 3 or more versions of the logo in active use?
- Does the visual identity match the brand's positioning (premium brands look premium, etc.)?
- Is the visual identity distinctive or generic?

---

### DIMENSION 3 — MESSAGING CONSISTENCY (Score: /5)

**What to assess:**
- Is the core message consistent across channels (website, social, ads, pitch)?
- Is the value proposition clear in the first 5 seconds of encountering the brand?
- Are key messages supported by proof points?
- Is messaging audience-appropriate?

**Questions to answer:**
- What does the homepage hero say vs. the social bio vs. the pitch deck intro?
- Are these consistent? If not, where do they diverge?

---

### DIMENSION 4 — VOICE & TONE CONSISTENCY (Score: /5)

**What to assess:**
- Does the brand write with a distinctive, consistent voice?
- Does tone adapt appropriately by channel without losing identity?
- Is the writing human or corporate?
- Does copy reflect the brand's personality?

**Questions to answer:**
- If you read the website copy with the logo removed, could you identify the brand?
- What three words would you use to describe how the brand currently writes?

---

### DIMENSION 5 — AUDIENCE ALIGNMENT (Score: /5)

**What to assess:**
- Is the brand clearly speaking to a defined audience?
- Does the brand use the audience's language?
- Does the brand's positioning solve a problem the audience actually has?
- Is the brand positioned where the audience is looking?

---

### DIMENSION 6 — COMPETITIVE DIFFERENTIATION (Score: /5)

**What to assess:**
- Is this brand immediately distinct from its top 3 competitors?
- Is there a clear reason to choose this brand over alternatives?
- Does the brand occupy a unique position or is it "me too"?

---

## Output: Audit Report

---

### BRAND HEALTH SCORECARD

| Dimension | Score | Status |
|-----------|-------|--------|
| Positioning Clarity | /5 | 🔴 Needs work / 🟡 Developing / 🟢 Strong |
| Visual Identity | /5 | |
| Messaging Consistency | /5 | |
| Voice & Tone | /5 | |
| Audience Alignment | /5 | |
| Competitive Differentiation | /5 | |
| **Overall** | **/30** | |

---

### WHAT'S WORKING

List 3–4 specific strengths. Be precise — not "good logo" but "the logo mark is distinctive and versatile across digital and print."

---

### WHAT'S NOT WORKING

List 3–5 specific issues, ranked by priority. For each:
- **Issue** (specific problem)
- **Evidence** (what you observed that indicates this)
- **Impact** (why this matters for the brand)

---

### PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS

Rank recommended actions by impact and urgency:

**Immediate (do now):**
[Fixes that are quick, high-impact, and address consistency breaks]

**Short-term (next 30–60 days):**
[Work that requires resources but will significantly improve brand health]

**Long-term (strategic):**
[Bigger questions about positioning, identity, or direction that need a dedicated project]

---

## Related Skills

- **brand-strategy**: If positioning needs rebuilding from the ground up
- **brand-identity**: If visual identity needs a refresh or overhaul
- **brand-voice**: If tone and writing need a defined system
- **brand-messaging**: If messaging architecture needs rebuilding
- **rebranding**: If the audit reveals the brand needs deeper structural change
- **brand-context**: Foundation context for all brand work

Excerpt, first 5,980 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

git clone https://github.com/arnabbagxd/brand-building-skills
git -C brand-building-skills checkout 14a43c1c0c04

Works in

1. 2026-10-23
   ✓SAFE B 89 / 100

   first audit · source 14a43c1c0c04

Questions about brand-audit

• github.com/arnabbagxd/brand-building-skills/tree/main/skills/bra — the audited source at commit 14a43c1c0c04 and every finding aboveObserved · 23 Oct 2026

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology