influencer-campaign-brief

{
  "skill_name": "influencer-campaign-brief",
  "evals": [
    {
      "id": 1,
      "prompt": "We just signed Ravi Menon (@ravibuilds, 140k followers, short-form video) for Kestrel Athletics, our trail-running shoe brand. The signed deal is 2 short-form videos plus one 3-frame story set, one revision round, flat fee of 4,800 EUR, code KESTREL20 at 20% off. Honestly I want three videos in the brief instead of two because the launch needs more coverage, and since this is a conversion campaign (we are measured on code redemptions) I want to give him a tight script framework so the offer lands exactly right. Posting window is April 6-10, drafts due March 27. Write me the brief.",
      "expected_output": "The deliverable-count contradiction with the signed deal is stopped and flagged rather than absorbed, the scripted-framework request is refused, low creative freedom is removed from the menu because the deal carries one revision round, and the brief specifies two videos plus a three-frame story set with full precision fields.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Flags the three-videos-versus-two contradiction with the signed deal explicitly instead of producing a brief that lists three videos.",
        "States that the signed deal wins and that the brief may specify deliverables but never change them.",
        "Routes renegotiating the deliverable count to a negotiation skill rather than adjusting the deal inside the brief.",
        "Removes the low creative-freedom level from consideration entirely because the deal includes one revision round, rather than ranking it last or offering it as a choice.",
        "Gives the reason that a framework brief is enforced through revision rounds this deal does not include.",
        "Declines to supply a word-for-word script or scripted sentences outside mandatory legal or offer wording.",
        "States an explicit creative-freedom level in the brief itself rather than leaving it implicit.",
        "Names the specific condition behind any demotion from the high default.",
        "States the revision-round count in the brief as one, matching the signed deal, and does not invent a different number.",
        "Sorts every brief item into either non-negotiable or preference, leaving nothing unlabeled between the two.",
        "Specifies each deliverable with count, duration, aspect ratio, link or code mechanism, draft deadline, and posting window.",
        "Requires disclosure on every story frame carrying promotional messaging, not only the first frame.",
        "Requires the KESTREL20 code to be live and tested before the posting window opens.",
        "Includes a section naming why this specific creator was chosen and which of his strengths the campaign leans on, so the brief could not be handed unchanged to a different creator."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 2,
      "prompt": "Need the creator brief for Brightline Coffee x @noorbrews. Signed: 1 short-form video, 15-45 seconds, plus 2 in-feed statics, two revision rounds, 3,200 USD flat. Awareness campaign, the goal is reach on our new cold brew line. Noor always uses whatever sound is trending that week and honestly that is a big part of why her stuff works, so I do not want to touch that at all. If the video performs we will probably put some ad spend behind it afterwards to extend reach. Draft the brief.",
      "expected_output": "Paid-media intent is declared inside the brief before any audio is chosen, the trending-audio licensing conflict is surfaced with its consequence, the music choice stays the creator's while licensing becomes the lock, and both formats carry full specs with a dedicated disclosure section.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Declares paid-media intent inside the brief because amplification is possible, rather than leaving the declaration until after the content exists.",
        "States that trending platform audio is generally not licensed for paid amplification.",
        "States that declaring paid intent after the content is created forces a re-edit.",
        "Makes licensed audio a non-negotiable constraint while leaving the actual sound or music selection to the creator.",
        "Does not dictate a specific track, cut pacing, or editing approach.",
        "Sets the creative-freedom level to high and states it in the brief.",
        "Ties the high freedom level to the awareness goal.",
        "Gives the short-form video an aspect ratio and a duration that sits inside the 15-45 seconds the deal fixed.",
        "Gives the in-feed statics an aspect ratio.",
        "Places disclosure in its own brief section covering required wording, placement, the platform branded-content tool, and who verifies after the content is live.",
        "Requires disclosure both spoken and on-screen for the video and in the first caption line for the statics.",
        "Caps key messages at three or fewer, each paired with a proof point the brand can back."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 3,
      "prompt": "I run partner marketing at Ledgerwise, a payments-reconciliation platform for mid-market finance teams. We signed Dana Okafor, who writes a finance-ops newsletter with about 11,000 subscribers and posts long-form on the professional networks. Deal: one sponsored newsletter deep-dive plus one long-form post, one revision round, four-week window, 9,000 USD. Goal is qualified demo requests. We want to run her post as a thought-leader ad through our own ad account. We are fintech, so legal will need to look at anything quantified. Can you write the brief?",
      "expected_output": "The thought-leader-ad constraint is surfaced and paid-readiness settled before the organic post goes live, the regulated-category review is compartmentalized by function with an SLA and its own dated timeline step, low freedom is removed given one revision round, and both B2B deliverables carry their own precision fields.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "States that in a thought-leader ad format the ad creative is the creator's own post, so any edit must come from the creator.",
        "Requires paid-readiness and final wording to be settled before the organic post goes live.",
        "States that promoting the post afterwards would otherwise require a re-post.",
        "Declares the paid-media intent inside the brief rather than after publication.",
        "Assigns a reviewer per function, with legal checking claims and disclaimers, product checking accuracy, and brand checking fit, rather than one generic approval pass.",
        "Includes an approval SLA or stated turnaround for that review.",
        "Dates the extra compliance review step in the timeline instead of shortening the creator's drafting time to absorb it.",
        "States the revision-round count as one, matching the signed deal.",
        "Removes the low creative-freedom level from the menu because the deal includes one revision round or fewer.",
        "Specifies the newsletter slot with word count, position in the issue, number of links, whether a subject-line mention is required, and the disclosure line.",
        "Specifies the long-form post with its length, first-line disclosure, and whether the tracked link sits in the post body or the first comment.",
        "Requires any quantified claim to carry approved proof or to be attributed as the brand's own claim rather than as the creator's measured result.",
        "Routes KPI and attribution design to a measurement skill while keeping the campaign goal and the tracking mechanics inside the brief.",
        "Grounds the credibility of the content in the creator's hands-on operating experience rather than her subscriber count or reach."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 4,
      "prompt": "Here is the brief my colleague drafted for Mika Sandoval, the creator we signed for Nordhaus Kitchenware (deal is 2 short-form videos, two revision rounds, 2,500 USD). Can you tighten it up and make it sharper? --- CAMPAIGN: Nordhaus Spring. Script (read exactly as written): 'Hey guys!! I am OBSESSED with my new Nordhaus pan...' Shoot in bright natural light, pan handle facing camera at all times, cut every 2 seconds, use an upbeat trending sound. See attached brand guidelines (68 pages) and ensure full compliance. Deliverables: 3 videos and some stories. We will review until we are happy with it. Please mention it is your honest opinion. Disclosure: just add the usual hashtags somewhere. Also do not forget to sound authentic!",
      "expected_output": "Every locked-voice instruction is removed rather than polished, the deliverable count is reconciled against the signed deal, revisions are bounded to two, the style guide is reduced to the rules that bear on this content, and disclosure gets its own section with a named post-live verifier.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Removes the word-for-word script, keeping verbatim wording only where legal or offer language requires it.",
        "Removes the camera and lighting directions.",
        "Removes the dictated cut pacing.",
        "Removes the dictated trending-sound instruction, replacing it with a licensing constraint only where paid media is possible.",
        "Flags that '3 videos and some stories' contradicts the signed deal's two videos and must be reconciled against the deal rather than carried forward.",
        "Replaces 'we will review until we are happy' with the deal's two revision rounds stated as a number in the brief.",
        "Replaces the 68-page brand guideline attachment with the 5 to 10 rules that bear on this content type.",
        "Says explicitly that the full brand guideline document was deliberately left out, rather than listing it as a lower-priority item.",
        "Specifies each video with count, duration, aspect ratio, link or code mechanism, draft deadline, and posting window.",
        "Gives disclosure its own section with required wording, placement, the platform branded-content tool, and a named post-live verifier, instead of a hashtag footnote.",
        "Removes the instruction to frame the content as the creator's honest opinion and identifies it as a fabricated-experience risk on a paid post.",
        "Removes or flags the 'sound authentic' instruction as contradicting the voice the rest of the brief had locked.",
        "Applies an interchangeability check, stating that the brief must fail for any creator other than this one.",
        "Labels every remaining item as either non-negotiable or preference."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 5,
      "prompt": "Aurelle is a clean-beauty brand launching a vitamin-C serum. We signed Priya Raman for 1 in-feed static and a 4-frame story set, two revision rounds, 6,000 USD. She wants to show her own skin at week 1 versus week 6. The goal is consideration, we want people to remember us when they next repurchase. Our legal team gave me a list of things we cannot say: 'clears acne' and 'dermatologist proven'. Give me the brief.",
      "expected_output": "Disclosure is required on every promotional story frame with its reason, the before-and-after content is routed to compliance review before posting, prohibited claims arrive with approved alternative wording, and the platform tool is stated as additive to written disclosure.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Requires the disclosure label on every story frame carrying promotional messaging, not only the first frame.",
        "Gives the reason that viewers enter a story sequence mid-way, so a first-frame-only label leaves later frames reading as undisclosed advertising.",
        "Specifies the story set at 9:16 with a per-frame duration and the link or code mechanism.",
        "Specifies the in-feed static with an aspect ratio and disclosure in the first caption line.",
        "Flags the week-1 versus week-6 before-and-after content for compliance review before posting.",
        "Lists each prohibited claim with approved alternative wording beside it rather than as a bare prohibition.",
        "Carries both 'clears acne' and 'dermatologist proven' into the prohibited-claims list explicitly.",
        "States that the platform branded-content tool is in addition to written disclosure and does not replace it.",
        "Names who verifies disclosure after the content is live.",
        "States a creative-freedom level and names the condition behind any demotion from the high default.",
        "Routes the pre-publication check of Priya's finished content to a disclosure-compliance skill rather than performing that check inside the brief."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 6,
      "prompt": "Our CI/CD product Foundry Tools just signed @benchmarked_dev for a creator campaign. Give me the finished brief document and I will fill in the blanks afterwards. Please do not ask me a bunch of questions first, I am short on time this week.",
      "expected_output": "No brief is produced this turn. Questions are asked one at a time with options, the signed deal is established as the deliverable source of truth, and two or three candidate angles grounded in the creator's own content are proposed with a recommendation before any drafting starts.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Does not deliver a filled-in brief before a message angle has been chosen.",
        "Asks one question at a time rather than presenting a block of questions at once.",
        "Offers multiple-choice answers where the question allows it.",
        "Asks whether this is a B2B creator program or a B2C brand collaboration.",
        "Asks which deliverables the signed deal already commits to, and treats that answer as the source of truth the brief may specify but never change.",
        "Asks how many revision rounds the signed deal includes.",
        "Asks whether the content will run as paid media.",
        "Asks what tracking mechanic the creator will use, such as a promo code, tracked link, or dedicated landing page.",
        "Proposes two or three candidate message angles, each stated with its hook, key message, proof point, best-fit deliverable, and trade-off.",
        "Recommends one of the candidate angles and says why.",
        "Grounds the candidate angles in the creator's own recent content, or asks the user for representative posts, rather than deriving them from generic brand copy.",
        "States that the delivered brief will carry no unfilled placeholder fields, rather than handing over a template with blanks."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 7,
      "prompt": "Quick one before I write our brief for Halden Audio x @sonicsam, a micro creator at about 40k followers. What is the standard number of revision rounds for a creator campaign? I want to put the industry-standard number in the brief. Also I saw a stat that 37% of creators say brand briefs are too restrictive, and I would like to open the brief with that to show we get it. And can you cite the creator-freedom research properly so it lands with our legal team?",
      "expected_output": "The 37% figure is refused as unverifiable, no industry-standard round count is supplied, the round count is tied to whatever the signed deal includes, the creator-freedom survey figures are cited only with their methodology and no named attribution, and an internal campaign log is proposed as the real benchmark.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Refuses to quote the 37% figure and states that it fails source verification.",
        "States that no trustworthy benchmark exists for revision counts.",
        "States that the revision-round count in the brief equals what the signed deal includes and is not a number the brief invents.",
        "Describes any published revision-count figure as a vendor assertion rather than an industry standard.",
        "Presents tier-based round guidance, if used at all, only as a sanity check on what was negotiated, never as a number to impose.",
        "Cites the creator-freedom figures only with their methodology: a single vendor-run survey of that vendor's own creator database, n=403 creators, roughly plus or minus 4.9% at 95% confidence.",
        "Does not attribute the creator-freedom figures to a named person.",
        "States the creator-freedom figures accurately if it uses them: 10% report genuine creative control and 53% want more freedom.",
        "Declines to present any briefing formulation as an industry standard.",
        "Proposes benchmarking against the brand's own campaign log instead of an external number.",
        "Names campaign-log metrics such as revisions used against rounds included, on-time draft rate, first-submission spec compliance, disclosure compliance at publication, and whether the creator re-signed."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 8,
      "prompt": "Vantara Outdoor is briefing Kai Oyelaran, a hiking and gear creator, on our new down jacket. Deal is two videos, three revision rounds, 7,500 USD. Our brand book runs 90 pages and marketing wants the whole thing attached to the brief. One complication: we are in the middle of a public fight about our down sourcing, there was a trade-press story about it last month, and Kai has posted about animal welfare on his own channel before. What guardrails should the brief carry?",
      "expected_output": "Guardrails are ranked by risk removed per unit of freedom taken with the default top three named, the sensitive-topic list is promoted above its ratio position because both promotion conditions fire, down sourcing and animal welfare are named explicitly, and the 90-page book is reduced to the rules that bear on this content.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Ranks the guardrails by brand risk removed per unit of creator freedom taken, and states that ranking explicitly rather than implying it by list order.",
        "Puts mandatory verbatim legal wording and disclosure, prohibited claims, and factual accuracy standards in the default top three.",
        "Promotes the sensitive-topic list above its usual ratio position because the brand has a live controversy and the creator's own content already touches the topic.",
        "Names down sourcing and animal welfare explicitly as the sensitive topics rather than leaving the sensitivity unstated.",
        "States that an unnamed sensitivity silently swallows the creative freedom granted elsewhere in the brief.",
        "Extracts 5 to 10 rules from the 90-page brand book instead of attaching it.",
        "Says explicitly that the full brand book was left out, rather than listing it as a lower-priority option.",
        "Deletes dictated wording, camera angles, music choice, cuts, and caption phrasing from the guardrail menu rather than ranking them last.",
        "Pairs each prohibited claim with approved alternative wording.",
        "Keeps the creative-freedom default at high and names any condition that would demote it.",
        "Keeps disclosure as its own brief section in addition to listing it among the guardrails."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 9,
      "prompt": "Our creator Elin Vasquez (food, mid-size) just sent the first draft for the Marrow & Co brief we sent her. We told her the freedom level was high. Honestly the hook is weak, she films in her garage instead of a kitchen, and the pacing drags badly in the middle. The offer and the code are correct and the disclosure is there. We have two rounds in the deal and this is round one. What feedback do I send her? Also, the landing page we set up is not live yet and she posts Thursday.",
      "expected_output": "The draft is judged against non-negotiables only and approved on that basis, hook, setting and pacing notes are withheld as preferences granted under high freedom, and the dead landing page is treated as the blocker that must clear before Thursday's posting window.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Judges the draft against the non-negotiables only, and confirms the offer, code, and disclosure are correct.",
        "Declines to send feedback on the hook because the hook was a preference under the stated high freedom level.",
        "Declines to send feedback on the filming setting for the same reason.",
        "Declines to send feedback on pacing for the same reason.",
        "States that granting freedom in the brief and revoking it at validation damages the relationship more than a tight brief would have.",
        "Treats the landing page not being live as a blocker that must be resolved before Thursday's posting window opens.",
        "States that content posted without working tracking is unattributable afterwards.",
        "Notes that spending a revision round on preference-level notes consumes one of the two the deal includes.",
        "Does not propose adding revision rounds beyond the two the deal includes.",
        "Reminds the user who verifies disclosure after the content goes live.",
        "Does not rewrite the creator's hook, script, or captions as part of the feedback."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": 10,
      "prompt": "Putting together the brief for our Q3 creator push at Tessellate (B2B analytics). Four things I need from you: first, we have three creators shortlisted and need to pick one, I can paste their follower counts; second, write the brief once we pick; third, I also need the attribution model and the KPI dashboard for this campaign; and fourth, the signed contract says 6-month usage rights but marketing wants 12, so just put 12 months in the brief so it is documented. Deal is 1 webinar appearance plus 2 long-form posts, two revision rounds.",
      "expected_output": "Creator selection and measurement design are routed to sibling skills, the 12-month usage-rights request is refused as a silent rewrite of a signed 6-month term and routed to negotiation, and the brief references the agreement's usage terms instead of restating them.",
      "files": [],
      "expectations": [
        "Declines to pick among the three shortlisted creators and routes creator selection to a discovery skill.",
        "States that this brief starts after the deal is signed.",
        "Routes attribution-model and KPI-dashboard design to a measurement skill.",
        "Keeps only the campaign goal and the tracking mechanics inside the brief itself.",
        "Refuses to write 12-month usage rights into the brief when the signed contract says six months.",
        "States that the signed agreement wins and that the contradiction must be flagged rather than silently rewritten.",
        "Routes the usage-rights change to a negotiation skill.",
        "References the signed agreement's usage terms rather than restating them in the brief.",
        "States that follower count is not the credibility signal for a B2B audience, pointing instead to hands-on operating experience.",
        "States the revision-round count as two, matching the signed deal."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "trigger_queries": [
    { "query": "Write the campaign brief for the creator we just signed", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "I need a creator brief for a short-form video campaign", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "We signed an influencer last week, what do I send her so she knows what to make?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Draft a content brief for our brand collab", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Turn this signed deal memo into a brief for the creator", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "What actually goes in an influencer campaign brief?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "How much creative freedom should I give the creator in the brief?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Help me write the deliverables section for our creator brief", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Our creator keeps asking what she can and cannot say and I need to write it down", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Brief template for a paid partnership post", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "We are briefing a newsletter writer for a sponsored deep-dive, what should the brief cover?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "I have to tell a podcaster exactly what we need from the host-read, where do I start?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "How do I stop the creator going off-message without scripting her?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Need the document that goes to the creator after contract signature", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "What should the non-negotiables be in our creator brief?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Draft a brief for our B2B creator program, one long-form post and one newsletter slot", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "How many revision rounds do I put in the brief?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Write up the campaign requirements for @someonecooks, launch is March 12", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "We are doing a thought leader ad with a creator, what does the brief need to say?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "The creator wants to know the disclosure requirements, can you write that section?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Put together the creative brief for our spring collab", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "My colleague's brief is basically a four-page script, help me fix it", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "creator deliverables doc", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "How do I brief a creator on a discount code campaign?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Need to write the guardrails for our influencer campaign", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "We have booked the creator and paid the deposit, what is the next document?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "What do I hand the creator so we do not argue about the videos later?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Brief for a story takeover", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Sponsored newsletter brief, what fields am I missing?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Write an influencer brief for our skincare launch", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "How specific should I be about video length and aspect ratio for the creator?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "We keep getting content that does not match what we asked for, fix our briefing", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Creator campaign brief for a conversion campaign with a promo code", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "I need to document what the creator can post and when", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Help me brief a creator without killing their voice", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "What does a good brand-to-creator brief look like?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Draft the creative direction doc for our ambassador's first post", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "We might boost the creator's video with ad spend, does that change what we send her?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Brief a creator for a webinar appearance and two posts", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Write the timeline and review section for our creator campaign", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "The deal says 2 videos but we want 3, how do I word that in the brief?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Set up the doc that tells our signed creator what to produce", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "influencer campaign brief", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "creator brief", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "What should I lock down and what should I leave to the creator?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Our legal team gave me claims we cannot make, where does that go in the brief?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Need to brief a creator on a regulated fintech product", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "How do I write the key messages for a creator campaign?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "We signed a gaming creator for a launch, write the brief", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "What is the right structure for the document we send a creator before they film?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Brief my creator on tracking links and promo codes", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Can you write the paid partnership brief for our March campaign?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "I want a one-page brief for the creator, not a 20-page deck", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "The creator asked for a brief, what do I put in it?", "should_trigger": true },
    { "query": "Which of these five creators should we work with?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Build the scoring criteria for shortlisting influencers", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the first DM to an influencer we want to pitch", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Draft the cold email pitching a partnership to a YouTuber", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "What rate should I offer this creator?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Prepare me for the usage rights negotiation with a creator", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "What is my walk-away point on exclusivity with this influencer?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Design the KPI set for our influencer campaign", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "How do I attribute conversions to an influencer campaign?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Build the reporting cadence for our creator program", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Check whether this caption meets FTC disclosure rules", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Does '#sp' count as adequate disclosure in the UK?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Review this video transcript for disclosure compliance", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Design the commission rates for our affiliate program", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the terms and conditions affiliates accept when joining", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Draft the welcome sequence for newly approved affiliates", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write outreach copy to recruit new affiliates", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Our affiliate payouts look wrong, audit this run", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Flag cookie stuffing in our affiliate data", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Spec the metrics for an affiliate performance dashboard", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Rank our candidate strategic alliances", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the deal registration policy for partner co-selling", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Plan a joint go-to-market motion with our new partner", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Design the tier structure for our reseller program", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Map our whole partner ecosystem", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Sequence the training our channel partners need", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Model the unit economics of this partner relationship", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the rules of engagement for direct versus channel conflict", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Which cloud marketplaces should we list on?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Set reward caps for our refer-a-friend program", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "How much should we pay for a customer referral?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Build the per-partner scorecard and QBR structure", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "What does a partnerships manager get paid at a Series B?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the job description for a channel partner manager", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Which partnerships skill should I use for this task?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Decide which partner categories to add next", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Design our partner program from scratch", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write an SEO content brief for our blog post", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Create a design brief for the new landing page", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Give me a competitive brief on our top three rivals", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Summarize my meetings into a daily briefing", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Prep me for my 9am meeting", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Turn this brief into engineering tasks", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Build my weekly prep brief", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Plan a marketing campaign for our Q4 launch", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Set up a user acquisition campaign on Meta", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Scrape Instagram for influencers in the fitness niche", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "What should our overall influencer marketing strategy be next year?", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the creative brief for our agency to produce the TV spot", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Draft the statement of work for the freelance videographer we hired", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the internal campaign brief for our own marketing team's launch", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Our employee advocacy program needs guidelines for what staff can post", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Write the UGC guidelines for customers posting about our product", "should_trigger": false },
    { "query": "Brief our in-house video team on the product demo shoot", "should_trigger": false }
  ]
}

# Brief anatomy - section by section

Labels in this file mark where claims come from:

- **corroborated**: three or more independent publishers agree
- **single-vendor**: one company's published formulation
- **inference**: a reasoned default, not a published formulation

## The corroborated core - every brief carries these

1. **Campaign context and goal** - campaign name, what is promoted, the business goal in one sentence with its metric, timeline, geography. Plain language; no internal jargon the creator can't decode (corroborated).
2. **Audience** - role or persona, their current pain, what they believe today, the belief shift the campaign wants (corroborated; the belief-shift framing itself is single-vendor).
3. **Key messages**:
   - one-sentence primary message
   - supporting messages capped at two or three ("more than three, none land" - the low cap is corroborated)
   - 3-5 factual proof points
   - prohibited claims and comparisons
   - any mandatory legal wording that must appear verbatim
4. **Deliverables** - specified to precision fields (format, count, platform, aspect ratio, duration, and the in-frame requirements each format carries), never a bare format name (corroborated).
5. **Creative guardrails** - explicit do and don't lists, tone, off-limit topics, brand-safety requirements, accuracy standards, and the boundary past which the creator's own judgement governs (corroborated). Reference examples from the creator's own past work, never from other creators (single-vendor, and it reinforces the interchangeability test).
6. **Disclosure** - required wording, placement, whether the platform's branded-content tool is also mandatory (it adds to written disclosure, never replaces it), and who verifies after the content is live (corroborated). The advertiser is held responsible for its creators, so this section is load-bearing, not boilerplate.
7. **Rights and paid amplification** - _references_ the signed agreement's usage terms, never restates or replaces them (single-vendor formulation - the deal-wins principle is this skill's hard rule). Declares here whether content will run as paid media.
8. **Timeline** - every milestone dated: questions window, concept, draft, revision windows, posting window (corroborated).
9. **Review and approval** - who reviews, the feedback channel, and the revision-round count, which equals what the signed deal includes (corroborated as a bounding principle - see below).
10. **Tracking** - promo code, tracked-link naming convention, landing URL, reporting window, required analytics exports, internal owner (corroborated that tracking belongs in the brief - designing the measurement framework is the sibling skill's job).

## Single-vendor sections worth adding anyway

- **"Why you"** - why this specific creator was chosen and which of their strengths the campaign leans on. One publisher only, but it primes the creator to use exactly the strength the brand paid for.
- **Brand context block** - two or three lines on the brand for a first collaboration (one publisher). Skip it for repeat creators.

## Length

- One to two pages maximum, one to three lines per section: short, shareable, easy to review (single-vendor, the only published length guidance found).
- Directionally consistent with the corroborated "5-10 rules that actually matter" advice: the brief is a summary, never the full brand style guide.

## Approval workflow model (single-vendor - a usable default, not a standard)

1. Brief sent.
2. Creator questions within 2 days.
3. Concept approval.
4. Draft review.
5. Posting within the agreed window.
6. Post-live disclosure verification.
7. Analytics submitted after the reporting window closes.

## Revision rounds by creator tier (single-vendor, explicitly its own methodology, no citations)

Use only as a starting point to sanity-check what the deal negotiated - never as a benchmark to impose. The rows are not ranked and must not be: the round count is a negotiated term the brief reflects, so ordering the tiers by efficiency would recommend a number the brief has no authority to set.

| Tier             | Rounds | Approval style          |
| ---------------- | ------ | ----------------------- |
| Nano (1K-10K)    | 1      | simple written approval |
| Micro (10K-100K) | 1-2    | 3-day review window     |
| Mid (100K-500K)  | 2      | dedicated contact       |
| Macro (500K-2M)  | 3+     | extended process        |

The bounding principle is better corroborated than any number in that table: the round count must be stated in the brief and must match the signed deal. Unbounded revisions are the documented failure. The specific integer is a negotiated term the brief never invents.

## Timeline norms (single-vendor - a planning anchor, not a norm)

A standard campaign runs roughly 16 working days:

- brief creation: 2 days
- first draft: 5 days
- feedback and revisions: 5 days combined
- approval and localization: 4 days

Video-heavy edits run ~13 working days on their own; quick fixes run ~6. B2B chains that add legal or a product expert run longer (inference) - date the extra review step explicitly rather than compressing the creator's drafting time.

# Creator campaign brief - fill-in template

Copy, fill every field, delete any instruction line in parentheses. Keep the finished brief to one or two pages, one to three lines per section. Angle-bracket fields are prompts to fill, not content to ship - a delivered brief contains none of them.

---

## <Brand> x <Creator> - <campaign name>

**Campaign goal:** <one sentence, plain language, ending with the metric - e.g. "drive trial signups, measured by code redemptions">
**Business context:** <what is promoted, timeline, geography - two lines max; skip for repeat creators>

### Why you

<Why this specific creator was chosen and which of their strengths this campaign leans on - one or two lines, grounded in their actual work>

### Audience

<Who this content is for: role or persona, their current pain, what they believe today, the belief shift wanted - two or three lines>

### Key messages

**Primary message (approved angle):** <one sentence>
**Supporting messages (three max):**

1. <message> - proof: <the fact, result, or source that backs it>
2. <message> - proof: <...>
3. <message> - proof: <...>

**Prohibited claims and comparisons:** <explicit list; add the approved alternative wording where one exists>
**Mandatory wording (must appear exactly):** <verbatim legal or offer language, or "none">

### Non-negotiables

- Offer: <price, discount, code, validity dates - exactly as the deal defines them>
- Disclosure: see its section below - it is a non-negotiable.
- <each remaining locked item, one line each: prohibited topics, accuracy requirements, brand-name spelling/pronunciation>

### Creative freedom

**Level: <high / medium / low - high unless a stated condition demoted it>** - <one line on why>
Yours to decide: <hook, setting, delivery, personal stories, editing - list what is genuinely open>
<For medium/low: the concept direction or framework the creator adapts, in two or three lines>

### Deliverables

| #   | Format   | Qty | Duration/length | Aspect ratio   | Link/code mechanism | Draft due | Posting window |
| --- | -------- | --- | --------------- | -------------- | ------------------- | --------- | -------------- |
| 1   | <format> | <n> | <s or words>    | <ratio or n/a> | <mechanism + code>  | <date>    | <dates>        |

<Per deliverable, add below the table: caption/hashtag/@mention requirements, code visibility, disclosure placement, raw-file delivery if the deal includes it. Write "creator's choice" where a field is deliberately open.>

**Paid media:** <"this content will/may run as paid media - use licensed audio only" or "organic only". In B2B thought-leader formats: paid-readiness settled before the organic post goes live.>

### Disclosure requirements

- Required wording: <e.g. "#ad" or "paid partnership with <brand>" - per the jurisdictions involved>
- Placement: <where viewers actually see it, per format - first caption line, spoken and on-screen for video>
- Platform branded-content tool: <required in addition to written disclosure / not applicable>
- Verified after posting by: <name/role>

### Timeline

| Milestone                 | Date    |
| ------------------------- | ------- |
| Questions from creator by | <date>  |
| Concept approval          | <date>  |
| First draft due           | <date>  |
| Revision window           | <dates> |
| Posting window            | <dates> |

### Review and approval

- Reviewer: <name/role> - Final sign-off: <name/role>
- Revision rounds included: <n - exactly what the signed deal includes>
- Feedback channel and turnaround: <channel, e.g. "written notes within 2 business days">

### Tracking

- <promo code / tracked link with naming convention / landing page URL> - live and tested before the posting window
- Reporting: <what the creator sends after the reporting window, e.g. platform analytics export, and to whom>

### Rights and payment

Per the signed agreement dated <date> - usage rights, exclusivity, and payment terms are defined there and are not restated here. Questions on terms go to <contact>, not this brief.

# Deliverable specs - precision is the anti-dispute mechanism

"3 short videos" is the canonical ambiguous deliverable (corroborated - every published source insists on specifying beyond a format name). Disputes come from what it silently fails to say. The brief specifies the signed deal's deliverables to this precision, and never adds or removes a deliverable the deal didn't include.

The formats below are deliberately not ranked against each other: the deal already fixed which ones ship, so an efficiency order over them would be false precision applied to a decision nobody is making here. Rank formats in the discovery and negotiation skills, where the choice is still open.

## Precision fields per deliverable

Fill every field that applies. Write "creator's choice" explicitly where a field is deliberately left open - silence reads as an oversight, not a freedom.

- Platform or channel type (short-form video platform, professional network, newsletter, podcast...)
- Format (in-feed post, story-format placement, short-form video, long-form video, sponsored newsletter slot, host-read segment)
- Quantity
- Duration or length (seconds for video/audio; word count for written)
- Aspect ratio (visual formats)
- Caption requirements, hashtags, and required @mentions
- Link destination and mechanism (link sticker, bio link, description, embedded link)
- Promo code and where it must be visible (spoken, on-screen, caption)
- Music/audio licensing constraint (see the paid-amplification trap below)
- Draft deadline
- Posting window (dates, and time-of-day only if the deal set one)
- Disclosure placement for this specific format
- Raw-file delivery format, if the deal includes asset handover

## Format spec table (single-vendor, and platform specs drift - verify against current platform documentation before using any number)

| Format           | Aspect ratio | Duration                 | Also requires                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
| ---------------- | ------------ | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| Story-format     | 9:16         | 45-60s across 3-4 frames | code visibility, link sticker, disclosure on **every frame carrying promotional messaging**, not only the first - story frames are entered mid-sequence, so a first-frame-only label leaves a viewer tapping into frame 2 looking at an undisclosed ad |
| Short-form video | 9:16         | 15-60s                   | licensed music, captions, disclosure spoken and on-screen                                                                                                                                                                                              |
| Static in-feed   | 1:1 or 4:5   | n/a                      | product visibility, offer details, disclosure in first caption line                                                                                                                                                                                    |

## The paid-amplification and audio-licensing trap

- If the content may ever run as paid media, declare it in the brief before the creator picks music: trending platform audio is generally not licensed for paid amplification (single-vendor, mechanically checkable). Declaring it after the fact forces a re-edit.
- Same trigger in B2B: thought-leader ad formats promote the creator's own post as-is, and edits must come from the original author - paid-readiness is settled before the organic post goes live, or promotion requires a re-post (single-vendor).
- The usage window, whitelisting rights, and exclusivity are deal terms: the brief points to them and never sets or restates them.

## B2B deliverable fields (inference - no published B2B spec list was found)

- Sponsored newsletter slot: word count, position in the issue, number of links, subject-line mention yes/no, disclosure line.
- Host-read podcast segment: duration, placement (pre/mid/post-roll), talking-point count, code read aloud, disclosure spoken at the segment start.
- Long-form professional-network post: length, first-line disclosure, link placement (post vs first comment - state which), paid-amplification intent.

# Examples

No real brand, creator, person, or statistic appears below. In a real engagement, every fact comes from the interview and the signed deal - never invent offers, dates, or claims.

## Table of Contents

- [Positive - B2C, conversion goal, medium freedom](#positive---b2c-conversion-goal-medium-freedom)
- [Positive - B2B, consideration goal, high freedom, thought-leader-ad constraint](#positive---b2b-consideration-goal-high-freedom-thought-leader-ad-constraint)
- [Negative - the over-scripted brief, annotated](#negative---the-over-scripted-brief-annotated)

## Positive - B2C, conversion goal, medium freedom

Scenario (illustrative): a plant-based meal-kit brand briefing a signed home-cooking creator on a short-form video platform. Deal includes 1 video + 2 story frames, two revision rounds, 15% code.

> ## <brand> x @jules.cooks - "Weeknight, actually"
>
> **Campaign goal:** drive first-box orders, measured by JULES15 redemptions.
>
> ### Why you
>
> Your weeknight-cooking series speaks to exactly the people who abandon our checkout: they want to cook, they don't want to plan. We picked you for the "real kitchen, real timing" style - keep it.
>
> ### Key messages
>
> **Primary:** a real dinner in 25 minutes without planning anything.
>
> 1. Every kit is designed for under 30 minutes - proof: cook-time printed on each recipe card.
> 2. First box is 15% off with your code - proof: the offer terms, valid Mar 1-31.
>
> **Prohibited:** no health or weight-loss claims of any kind; say "less prep" - never "healthier". No competitor comparisons.
> **Mandatory wording:** "15% off your first box with code JULES15, until March 31." (exact)
>
> ### Non-negotiables
>
> Offer as above; disclosure per its section; product name spelled "<brand>", one word.
>
> ### Creative freedom
>
> **Level: medium** - conversion goal, but your kitchen style is the asset. Concept direction: one real weeknight, kit arrival to plated dinner, timed on screen. Hook, narration, music (licensed - see paid note), and what you cook alongside: yours.
>
> ### Deliverables
>
> | #   | Format           | Qty      | Duration  | Ratio | Mechanism                            | Draft due | Posting             |
> | --- | ---------------- | -------- | --------- | ----- | ------------------------------------ | --------- | ------------------- |
> | 1   | short-form video | 1        | 30-60s    | 9:16  | code spoken + on-screen; link in bio | Mar 10    | Mar 14-18           |
> | 2   | story-format     | 2 frames | ~15s each | 9:16  | link sticker to landing page         | Mar 12    | within 48h of video |
>
> **Paid media:** the video may run as paid media - licensed audio only.
>
> ### Disclosure
>
> "#ad" in the first caption line, spoken in the video's first five seconds, platform paid-partnership label on. Verified post-live by R. Whitfield (partnerships).
>
> ### Review
>
> Reviewer: R. Whitfield; two revision rounds (per our agreement); written notes within 2 business days.

Why it passes the gate:

- matches the signed deal's deliverables and round count
- every item is locked or explicitly open
- facts locked, voice free
- the "why you" line makes it fail the interchangeability test in the right direction
- disclosure is a section, not a footnote
- paid intent declared before music exists

## Positive - B2B, consideration goal, high freedom, thought-leader-ad constraint

Scenario (illustrative): an expense-automation SaaS briefing a signed finance-operations newsletter writer. Deal includes 1 sponsored deep-dive + 1 professional-network post, one revision round. The post will be promoted as a thought-leader ad.

> ## <product> x M. Aldana - "Close week, minus the spreadsheet"
>
> **Campaign goal:** qualified demo requests, measured by the tracked link.
>
> ### Why you
>
> Your month-end-close series is read by the controllers who feel this pain weekly. We want your analysis, not our pitch - that's why the freedom level is high.
>
> ### Key messages
>
> **Primary:** manual expense reconciliation is a process problem, not a people problem.
>
> 1. Receipt-matching is automatable end to end - proof: product documentation; a demo account is provided for you to verify yourself.
> 2. Teams reclaim close-week evenings - proof: state as our claim ("<product> reports..."), not as your measured result.
>
> **Prohibited:** no named-competitor comparisons; no ROI percentages - none are approved for external use.
>
> ### Non-negotiables
>
> Disclosure per its section; product claims only as scoped above; demo-link mechanics below.
>
> ### Creative freedom
>
> **Level: high** - consideration goal. Angle, structure, examples, and tone are yours; write it as your analysis in which <product> is the worked example.
>
> ### Deliverables
>
> | #   | Format                         | Qty | Length         | Mechanism                            | Draft due | Posting      |
> | --- | ------------------------------ | --- | -------------- | ------------------------------------ | --------- | ------------ |
> | 1   | sponsored newsletter deep-dive | 1   | 800-1200 words | tracked link, disclosure line at top | Apr 8     | Apr 15 issue |
> | 2   | professional-network post      | 1   | your call      | tracked link in post body            | Apr 10    | Apr 15-17    |
>
> **Paid media:** the network post will be promoted as a thought-leader ad. The ad _is_ your post and any edit must come from you - so we settle final wording before it goes live; it cannot change after.
>
> ### Disclosure
>
> Newsletter: "Sponsored by <product>" above the deep-dive. Post: "Paid partnership with <product>" in the first line. Verified post-live by T. Osei (partner marketing).
>
> ### Review
>
> Reviewer: T. Osei plus compliance sign-off on the two product claims; one revision round (per our agreement).

B2B notes: the deliverable types and the compliance reviewer are the labeled inferences from the skill. The settle-before-live paid constraint is the one sourced B2B-specific rule, and is what the "paid media" line operationalizes.

## Negative - the over-scripted brief, annotated

Original composite of the documented failure modes, line by line.

> **Script (read exactly as written): "Hi guys! I am OBSESSED with <brand>..."**

Word-for-word scripting - the documented top failure. Locked voice produces content the audience instantly reads as an ad. The creator's delivery was the asset being purchased.

> **Shoot in bright natural light, product label facing camera at all times, cut every 2 seconds, use upbeat trending audio.**

Camera direction, edit pacing, and music dictated - all documented over-restriction. "Trending audio" also walks straight into the licensing trap if this ever runs as paid media, which the brief never declares.

> **See attached brand guidelines (74 pages) and ensure full compliance.**

The whole style guide instead of the 5-10 rules that matter - documented as noise that buries the rules that do matter.

> **Deliverables: 3 videos and some stories.**

No duration, ratio, link mechanism, code placement, deadlines, or posting window - the canonical vague deliverable, and "3 videos" may not even match the signed deal, which nobody checked.

> **We'll review until we're happy with it.**

Unbounded revisions - the documented failure. The deal's round count is absent because the brief never reconciled against the deal.

> **Please mention it's your honest opinion. (Disclosure: just add the usual hashtags somewhere.)**

Two failures in one line:

- coaching an "honest opinion" framing around a paid post risks a fabricated-experience claim
- disclosure as a footnoted "usual hashtags somewhere" fails wording, placement, and verification at once

> **Also don't forget to sound authentic!**

The contradiction that ends relationships: authenticity demanded after every choice that produces it - voice, pacing, setting, music - was locked. A brief cannot script its way to authentic.

Net effect: fails gate items 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 simultaneously, and passes the interchangeability test in the wrong direction - any creator on any platform could shoot this, which is exactly what the brand did not pay for.

# Freedom and guardrails - what to lock, what to leave open

The non-negotiables vs preferences split appears across four unrelated publishers under four different names:

- mandatory vs inspirational
- non-negotiables vs creative freedom
- to-include vs leave-open
- a template split named without mechanics

It is a convergent practice, not a named framework - the most corroborated structural idea in creator briefing.

## Lock these (non-negotiables)

- Discount codes and core offer details: price, dates, terms - exactly as the deal and the offer define them.
- Mandatory legal or regulated wording, verbatim, with "must appear exactly" stated.
- Prohibited claims and comparisons - listed explicitly, with the approved alternative wording where one exists.
- Disclosure wording and placement (own section in the brief; the compliance skill checks the finished content).
- Brand-name pronunciation and product-name spelling.
- Factual accuracy standards: no invented features, results, or customer status.

## Leave these open (preferences)

- Speaking style, delivery, and pacing.
- Setting, personal stories, and how the product enters the narrative.
- The hook - suggest angles from the brainstorm; never dictate the wording.
- Editing approach, cuts, and music (within the licensing constraint).
- Caption phrasing outside the mandatory elements.

"Script the facts, not the voice" (single-vendor phrasing, the clearest articulation found). Lock the first, never the second.

- Facts: claims, dates, prices, specs, regulated statements.
- Voice: framing, hooks, pacing, delivery.

## Freedom rungs, best ratio first (levels single-vendor; the ordering is this skill's)

Ordered by campaign result per unit of briefing effort - the axis lines, the default, and the promotion conditions live in SKILL.md § Non-negotiables vs preferences, where the level is chosen. Do not re-derive a different order here.

| Rung           | Creator controls                                  | Brief locks                                            | Costs you                                                                                                          | Promote when                                                                               |
| -------------- | ------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| High (default) | concept, setting, hook, script                    | messages, disclosure, prohibited claims                | about an hour of briefing, one round                                                                               | awareness goal, repeat creator, near-fixed live date, no in-house reviewer                 |
| Medium         | adapting a given concept direction to their style | the concept direction + all High locks                 | a day of briefing, a concept-approval step                                                                         | consideration goal, first collaboration, creator new to the category                       |
| Low            | voice and delivery only, within a framework       | the framework: structure, offer, code, CTA + all locks | about a week of coordination, plus the rounds spent enforcing the framework, plus sign-off on the scripted wording | the metric is a redemption or signup count, or a regulated category forces script approval |

State the level in the brief. A low-freedom brief is legitimate for conversion work - what is never legitimate is granting freedom on paper and revoking it at validation. Low is off the menu entirely, not demoted, when the deal includes one revision round or fewer.

## Why over-scripting fails (each formulation single-vendor; the direction is unanimous across all retrieved sources)

- Overly detailed briefs produce content that is technically correct but not something that creator would normally publish - the audience notices instantly.
- The interchangeability test: a brief that could be handed to any creator and produce roughly the same content has destroyed the exact audience-trust relationship the brand paid for.
- Creators are followed for their voice; micromanaging at the validation stage discourages the creator and impoverishes the result - and contradicting the brief's granted freedom damages the relationship more than a tight brief would have.
- Survey context (one vendor-run October 2025 survey of its own creator database, n=403 creators, ±4.9% at 95% confidence, paired with a brand survey, n=222, ±6.6%):
  - 10% of creators report genuine creative control.
  - 53% want more freedom.
  - 34% feel they have little to no influence in shaping campaigns.
  - Brands reuse 31% of creators annually, against an 8% creator retention rate.

  Cite only with this methodology - the figures already mutate in secondary retellings - and never attribute them to a named person.

## Which guardrails to spend the 5-10 rules on, best ratio first (items corroborated; the ordering is this skill's)

Rank guardrails by brand risk removed per unit of creator freedom taken, not by how uncomfortable each one makes the brand feel. Take the top three by default; add a lower rung only when its condition fires.

- efficiency (risk removed per unit of freedom taken): verbatim legal wording == prohibited claims > accuracy standards > competitor mentions > brand-safety adjacency > sensitive-topic list
- effort (drafting, and negotiating the item with the creator): sensitive-topic list > brand-safety adjacency > prohibited claims > verbatim legal wording == accuracy standards == competitor mentions
- compliance cost (review the item triggers before the brief goes out): prohibited claims == verbatim legal wording > brand-safety adjacency > the rest, which trigger none

The two `==` ties are real, not indecision:

- verbatim legal wording and the prohibited-claims list come out of one legal pass on one claim set, and each costs the creator only sentences they were never going to write
- accuracy standards and the competitor rule are each a single line lifted from the deal or the brand's standing policy

1. **Mandatory verbatim legal wording, and disclosure** - one or two sentences of freedom taken, and it removes the liability the advertiser itself carries.
2. **Prohibited claims and comparisons** - list the approved alternative wording beside each. The alternative is what keeps the cost near-zero instead of leaving the creator with a hole in the script.
3. **Factual accuracy standards** - no invented features, results, or customer status. Near-zero to write, and it is the rule that saves a takedown.
4. **Competitor mentions** - cheap to state, but it removes less risk than the three above; include it when the category is crowded enough that a comparison is likely.
5. **Brand-safety and content-adjacency requirements** - an hour to define properly, and worth it only when placement risk is real for this creator's surface.
6. **Topics sensitive for this brand** - highest effort and it costs the creator's own stories, which is the asset being bought. Name each topic explicitly. An unnamed sensitivity silently swallows the freedom granted above it.

What this order starves: the sensitive-topic list is high-value and high-effort, so it never survives a ratio ranking - promote it regardless when the brand has a live controversy, or when the creator's normal content already touches the topic.

Re-rank against what you know about the brand and creator:

- a regulated category promotes claims sign-off to first, and makes it non-optional
- a creator who has worked with this brand before demotes brand-safety definition, because it is already internalized
- no in-house legal makes the prohibited-claims list the only control that can actually be produced

Deleted from the menu, not ranked at the bottom of it (documented as harmful): dictating exact wording, camera angles, music choice, cuts, or caption phrasing, and attaching the complete brand style guide. They take voice - the thing the brand paid for - and remove no risk the six rungs above have not already removed.

Extract the 5-10 rules that bear on this content type. Leave the guide out, and say you left it out rather than listing it as a low-priority option that returns as scope.

## Regulated-category guardrails (single-vendor but concrete - always confirm with legal or compliance before the brief goes out)

- Health/fitness: an explicit "claims you cannot make" list with the approved alternative language beside each.
- Beauty: before-and-after content flagged for compliance review before posting.
- Fashion: a mood board works better than prescriptive instruction.
- Food/recipe: enough runtime (60-90s) that essential steps survive the edit.
- B2B regulated verticals - finance, security, HR/employment (inference): route every quantified claim through compliance sign-off before the brief is sent, and name the approver in the review section.

---
name: influencer-campaign-brief
description: Draft the creative campaign brief a brand hands to an already-signed influencer or creator for one campaign - deliverables with exact specs, key messages with proof points, brand guardrails, disclosure requirements, timeline, and bounded review rounds, split into non-negotiables vs preferences. Covers B2C brand collabs and B2B creator programs. Use whenever the user mentions a creator brief, campaign brief, content brief, creator deliverables, or briefing a creator they just signed, even if they never say brief. Starts after the deal is signed and reflects its terms exactly. Do NOT use for picking or vetting the creator - use mbfinotti/partnerships-skills@influencer-discovery-brief instead.
license: MIT
metadata:
  author: Maya-Beth Finotti
  version: "1.1.6"
---

# Influencer Campaign Brief

Draft the creative brief a brand hands to one already-signed creator for one specific campaign: deliverables, key messages, guardrails, disclosure, timeline, review rounds.

Creator briefing has no named, cross-vendor-adopted framework. Published guidance is a scatter of single-vendor formulations, none adopted beyond its own publisher:

- one publisher's nine-section list
- another's five-questions framing
- a third's do/don't blocks

The one structural idea corroborated across four unrelated publishers is separating non-negotiables from preferences, so this skill is built around it. Provenance labels below mark where a claim comes from:

- **corroborated**: three or more independent publishers
- **single-vendor**: one company's published formulation
- **survey**: one vendor-run survey with disclosed methodology
- **inference**: a reasoned default, not a published formulation

Never present any formulation here as an industry standard.

## Interview

Ask before drafting. One question per message; offer multiple-choice answers when possible; skip anything the user already answered.

- B2B creator program or B2C brand collab? (Drives deliverable types, approval chain, proof style.)
- Campaign goal in one sentence, with the metric? (Awareness / consideration / conversion - this also sets the freedom level.)
- Who is the signed creator, and on which platform or channel type? (Short-form video, professional network, newsletter, podcast...)
- Which deliverables does the signed deal already commit to? (This is the source of truth; the brief may specify them, never change them.)
- What are the key messages - three at most - and the proof behind each? (No claim ships without proof the brand can back.)
- Which brand guardrails and no-go topics apply?
- Do any claims need legal or regulatory sign-off before the brief goes out?
- By what date must the result land, and is it a fixed campaign moment (launch, event, seasonal date)? (A near date promotes high freedom - a framework brief is enforced through review rounds the calendar may not have.)
- One-off campaign, or the first of a relationship you intend to repeat with this creator? (Repeat intent promotes high freedom; granting freedom and revoking it at validation is what loses creators.)
- What is your effort ceiling: review rounds the signed deal includes, briefing hours available, and is there an in-house reviewer? (One round or no reviewer takes low freedom off the menu entirely.)
- Will the content be run as paid media? (Decides audio licensing and, in B2B, the thought-leader-ad mechanics - must be settled now, not later.)
- What tracking mechanics will the creator use: promo code, tracked link, dedicated landing page?
- Who reviews drafts, and who signs off?

## Workflow

1. Run the Interview; collect every answer before writing a word.
2. Reconcile the deliverables against the signed deal. On any contradiction: stop, flag it to the user, and never silently rewrite - the deal wins. Renegotiation belongs to the negotiation skill.
3. Enter brainstorming mode for the message angle (next section). Write no brief until the user picks an angle.
4. Set the creative-freedom level from the ranked default below - stated in the brief, never accidental.
5. Draft from [references/brief-template.md](references/brief-template.md), checking each section against [references/brief-anatomy.md](references/brief-anatomy.md). Keep the brief to one or two pages.
6. Specify every deliverable to the precision fields in [references/deliverable-specs.md](references/deliverable-specs.md). If paid amplification is possible, declare it in the brief now - the audio-licensing trap.
7. Write the disclosure section, covering required wording, placement, the platform branded-content tool, and who verifies after posting. Route the pre-publication content check itself to the compliance skill.
8. Bound the review rounds to exactly what the signed deal includes, and state that count in the brief.
9. Confirm the tracking mechanics exist and are tested before the posting window opens.
10. Validate the brief with the user section by section. Run the Quality gate. Iterate until every item passes.
11. Hand off the finished brief with a one-line reminder of who verifies disclosure post-live.
12. If your harness has persistent memory, memorize the approved angle, non-negotiables, freedom level, and (once known) revisions used and outcome - the next brief for the same brand or creator skips most of the interview. Otherwise hand the user a short recap to keep.

## Message-angle brainstorming

- Ground candidate angles in the creator's actual content and audience. If you can browse the web, review their two or three most recent pieces; otherwise ask the user for representative posts. Never derive an angle from generic brand copy.
- Propose 2-3 candidate angles, each stated as: hook, key message, proof point, the deliverable it fits best, and its trade-off. Recommend one and say why.
- Ask brainstorming questions one at a time. Draft nothing until the user explicitly picks an angle - the angle decides what gets locked and what stays free.

## Non-negotiables vs preferences - the central mechanism

- Sort every brief item into exactly two buckets: **non-negotiable** (locked, verbatim where required) or **preference** (inspiration; the creator's call). Corroborated across four unrelated publishers under four different names - the single most corroborated idea in creator briefing.
- Lock the facts, leave the voice (single-vendor phrasing, clearest articulation found). Never lock the voice.
  - Facts: claims, prices, dates, specs, regulated statements, disclosure.
  - Voice: framing, hook, pacing, setting, delivery.

### How much freedom to hand over - ranked

State a freedom level in the brief (single-vendor mapping: high for awareness, medium for consideration, low for conversion). The three levels are not equal-cost alternatives to pick by taste - rank them by campaign result returned per unit of briefing effort:

- efficiency (result per briefing hour): high > medium > low
- value (result bought): high > medium > low on awareness and consideration; low > medium > high on conversion, where the offer, code and CTA only land if the brief locks them
- effort (briefing hours, approval rounds, coordination): low > medium > high - low costs about a week of coordination plus the rounds it spends enforcing its framework, high costs about an hour and one round
- compliance cost (sign-off owed before the brief goes out): low > medium == high - medium and high send the same claim set to legal, and only low adds scripted framework wording that must itself be approved

- Default to **high**, and say so.
- Demote to **medium** on a first collaboration, or a creator new to the category.
- Demote to **low** only when the campaign metric is a redemption or signup count and the offer mechanics must land verbatim.

Delete low from the menu outright when the signed deal includes one revision round or fewer, and tell the user why: a framework brief is enforced through rounds that do not exist here. Never park it at the bottom of the list instead - a ruled-out level reappears as scope at validation.

What this order starves: low freedom is high-value and high-effort, so it loses every round and an efficiency-first habit under-briefs exactly the conversion campaigns paid to move a number. Promote it anyway when the metric is a redemption count, or when a regulated category forces script approval.

The ranking is a default, not a law - it shifts with the goal and with who executes it. Re-rank against what you already know about this user:

- a regulated category that forces script approval promotes low, whatever the goal
- a creator who has worked with this brand before promotes high one rung, because the guardrails are already internalized
- no in-house reviewer promotes high, because nobody is free to run the rounds the lower rungs consume

Freedom is also the axis creators report as scarcest (survey - one vendor-run October 2025 survey of its own creator database, n=403 creators, ±4.9% at 95% confidence): 10% report genuine creative control, 53% want more. Cite those figures only with that methodology, never attributed to a named person. Rung mechanics, lock/leave-open lists, and the ranked guardrail menu: [references/freedom-and-guardrails.md](references/freedom-and-guardrails.md).

## Invocation and expected output

Typical invocations:

- "Write the campaign brief for the creator we just signed - short-form video, launch is March 12, deal includes two revision rounds."
- "Turn this signed deal memo into a creator brief: one newsletter deep-dive plus one professional-network post, conversion goal, code JULES15."

Deliver one brief document (full template in [references/brief-template.md](references/brief-template.md)):

```
CREATOR CAMPAIGN BRIEF - <brand> x <creator>, <campaign name>
Campaign goal   : one sentence + the metric
Why you         : why this creator; which of their strengths the campaign leans on
Key messages    : approved angle; up to 3 messages, each with its proof point
Non-negotiables : locked facts - offer details, mandatory wording, prohibited claims
Preferences     : freedom level (high/medium/low) + what stays the creator's call
Deliverables    : per item - format / count / duration / specs / link mechanism / draft due / posting window
Disclosure      : required wording + placement + platform tool + who verifies post-live
Timeline        : dated milestones - questions, concept, draft, revisions, live date
Review          : who reviews, rounds included (= the signed deal's count), feedback channel
Tracking        : code / tracked link / landing page - live and tested before posting
Rights & paid   : paid-media intent declared; usage terms referenced from the signed deal, never restated
```

## B2B and B2C

- Same for both (published guidance never segments these by business model - a weak universality signal, itself an inference):
  - the brief structure
  - the non-negotiables/preferences split
  - deliverable precision
  - the disclosure obligation
  - bounded revisions
  - the do-not-script principle
- Honest limit: most published brief guidance is B2C-shaped, though one B2B-specific source now exists (ContentGrip's briefing playbook, Ariana Sorensen): for regulated categories (fintech, healthcare, cybersecurity, enterprise software), add required reviewer names or teams, substantiation requirements, prohibited words, mandatory disclaimers, and an approval SLA, with review compartmentalized - legal reviews claims and disclaimers, product reviews accuracy, brand reviews fit. This confirms and sharpens the approval-chain claim below.
- The one sourced B2B-specific mechanical constraint (single-vendor): in thought-leader ad formats, the ad creative _is_ the creator's own post, and edits must come from the original author. Settle paid-readiness before the organic post goes live - the post cannot be promoted without a re-post otherwise.
- Sourced (ContentGrip, regulated B2B categories): approval chains add named reviewers per function (legal, product, brand) plus an approval SLA, lengthening the review window - compartmentalized by what each reviewer checks, not stacked as one generic pass.
- Deliverable-mix effectiveness (survey - Content Marketing Institute / MarketingProfs 2025 B2B benchmark study, 980 B2B respondents of 1,186 total, fielded mid-2024): B2B marketers rate webinars (51%) and email newsletters (37%) among their most effective distribution channels, while reported podcast use fell year over year. A channel-effectiveness signal, not a pricing benchmark - the study prices nothing.
- Deliverable-mix pricing and measurability (single-vendor account - Ahrefs' Igor Gorbenko, on over $1M of creator sponsorship spend): LinkedIn and YouTube tracked cleanly; newsletter performance depended on partner-supplied data with limited visibility; podcast sponsorships were hardest to attribute to brand awareness for a name the audience did not already know, and an initial $14,000 across five podcast campaigns produced what the account calls "horrendous" results. The same account prices sponsored posts in three bands: $500-2,000 baseline, $3,000-9,000 a middle tier called not worth the cost, $10,000+ for creators with a track record and a fixed, trackable audience - its own examples being YouTube and newsletters.
- Labeled inference, not documented practice: B2B deliverables skew to newsletter slots, podcast reads, webinars, and long-form posts.
- Corroborated across three independent B2B creator-marketing publishers (Directive Consulting's Casie Akins, Walker Sands' Payal Pathak, ContentGrip's SaaS-creator coverage): personal, hands-on operating experience is the credibility layer a B2B audience actually trusts - real execution, not personality or reach - while business-outcome metrics (pipeline influence, demo requests, deal velocity) are the separate layer that measures and justifies the program afterward. Treat the two as complementary proof layers inside the same piece of content, not a strict B2B-versus-B2C swap of one proof type for the other.
- B2C: short-form video, story-format, and in-feed placements are well documented, as are regulated-category guardrails (health, beauty, food) - see [references/freedom-and-guardrails.md](references/freedom-and-guardrails.md).

## Quality gate

Score the drafted brief against all ten items. Pass threshold: 10/10. Iterate - redraft and re-validate - until nothing fails.

1. Deal-consistency test: every deliverable, review-round count, and rights mention matches the signed deal exactly; any contradiction was flagged to the user, never silently rewritten.
2. Interchangeability test (single-vendor test, adopted here as the gate): if any creator could have produced this content from this brief, the brief has destroyed the audience-trust the brand paid for. It must fail for everyone but this creator.
3. Every item is explicitly non-negotiable or preference; nothing sits unlabeled between the two.
4. No locked voice: no scripted sentences outside mandatory legal wording, no camera directions, no music or cut choices, no dictated caption phrasing.
5. Every deliverable carries count, duration or length, aspect ratio (visual formats), link or code mechanism, draft deadline, and posting window.
6. Disclosure has its own section - wording, placement, platform tool, verifier - never a footnote.
7. Paid-media intent is declared if amplification is even possible; in B2B thought-leader formats, paid-readiness is settled pre-publication.
8. The freedom level is stated, starts from the high default, and any demotion names the condition that caused it.
9. Key messages number three or fewer, each with proof the brand can back; prohibited claims are listed.
10. The brief fits one to two pages and carries only the 5-10 brand rules that matter for this content type, not the whole style guide.

## KPIs and measurement

- No trustworthy benchmark exists for brief quality or revision counts.
  - The largest annual industry benchmark study (315 marketers, 100 experts) measures neither.
  - A circulating "37% of creators" figure fails source verification - never quote it.
  - Any revision-count number found elsewhere is a vendor assertion.
- The brief states the campaign goal and the tracking mechanics the creator must use. Designing KPIs and attribution is the measurement skill's job - route it there.
- Benchmark against your own campaign log instead. Track per campaign:
  - revisions used vs rounds included
  - on-time draft rate
  - spec-compliance rate on first submission
  - disclosure compliance at publication
  - whether the creator re-signed
  - the campaign metric vs its goal
- If your harness has persistent memory, keep that log across sessions; otherwise hand the table to the user to maintain.

## Common failure modes

| Failure                                                         | Fix                                                                                                              |
| --------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Scripting the creator word-for-word                             | Lock facts, free voice; content that is "technically correct" but unlike their normal work converts nobody       |
| Disclosure missing or footnoted                                 | Dedicated section - wording, placement, platform tool, verifier; the advertiser is liable, not just the creator  |
| Unbounded revision rounds                                       | State the count in the brief; it equals what the deal includes - the brief never invents the integer             |
| Deliverable specs contradict the signed deal                    | Stop and flag; the deal wins; renegotiation goes to the negotiation skill                                        |
| Attaching the whole brand style guide                           | Extract the 5-10 rules that bear on this content type; the rest is noise                                         |
| Vague deliverables ("3 short videos")                           | Specify count, duration, aspect ratio, link mechanism, deadlines per the spec fields                             |
| Paid amplification declared after creation                      | Trending platform audio is not licensed for paid media - late declaration forces a re-edit; declare in the brief |
| Micromanaging at validation after granting freedom in the brief | Judge drafts against non-negotiables only; preferences were the creator's call and stay that way                 |
| No tracking live before the content posts                       | Test code, link, or landing page before the posting window opens; untracked content is unattributable forever    |

## Reference

- See [references/brief-template.md](references/brief-template.md) for the complete fill-in-ready brief document.
- See [references/brief-anatomy.md](references/brief-anatomy.md) for the section-by-section spec with provenance labels, the approval workflow model, and revision-round and timeline guidance.
- See [references/deliverable-specs.md](references/deliverable-specs.md) for per-deliverable precision fields, the format spec table, and the paid-amplification audio trap.
- See [references/freedom-and-guardrails.md](references/freedom-and-guardrails.md) for the lock/leave-open lists, freedom levels by goal, and legitimate vs over-restrictive guardrails.
- See [references/examples.md](references/examples.md) for a complete B2C brief, a complete B2B brief, and an annotated over-scripted negative example.
- See `mbfinotti/partnerships-skills@influencer-outreach` for the first-touch pitch - also done by the time the deal is signed.
- See `mbfinotti/partnerships-skills@influencer-negotiation-playbook` for the deal terms this brief reflects and must never renegotiate.
- See `mbfinotti/partnerships-skills@affiliate-disclosure-compliance` for the pre-publication disclosure check on the content this brief produces.
- See `mbfinotti/partnerships-skills@influencer-measurement-framework` for designing the KPIs and attribution the brief's tracking section feeds.