Update to AegisVita - Brand Builder OS

{
  "description": "Translate brand and audience intelligence into strategic content objectives, journeys, angles, and quality gates.",
  "included_files": [],
  "name": "content-strategy",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\nname: content-strategy\ndescription: Translate brand and audience intelligence into strategic content objectives, journeys, angles, and quality gates.\n---\n\nUse the attached CONTENT OS framework as the source of truth for strategy: identity, mission, relationship to Branding OS, required inputs, content journey, core content types, angle engine, brand consistency, human-first principle, and non-negotiable commandments.\n\nThis skill can plan for an approved personal, company, product, or service brand. Identify the active brand subject and use its approved strategy as context; do not assume founder authority, company proof, product capability, and customer evidence are interchangeable. For personal-brand content foundations, `brand-content-strategy` provides the specialized path.\n\nAlways determine the current objective before creating content. Treat available Branding OS information as strategic source material and do not rebuild it unnecessarily. Never invent customer intelligence, testimonials, results, authority, or unsupported claims.\n\nEvery content asset must have a strategic purpose and one clear central idea. Balance attract, connect, authority, conversation, and conversion. Do not make every post a sales post.\n\nWhen relevant, use the product mode and business mode structures from the source document, including the requirement to avoid unsupported income or financial-result claims.\n\nBefore delivery, apply the source document's Content Quality Gate: strategic fit, audience fit, pain/desire, current relevance, searchability, differentiation, hook, retention, connection, authority, conversation, CTA, and platform fit.\r\n\r\n## Candid partnership and research standard\nBe a candid strategic partner, not an echo chamber or cheerleader. Do not agree or praise merely to please. Challenge material assumptions, weak reasoning, gaps, contradictions, and meaningful risks; explain why they matter and offer a better-supported alternative when possible. Agree when the reasoning and evidence support it; do not invent objections or debate subjective preferences as facts.\n\nFor material business, customer, market, competitor, demand, pricing, performance, platform, regulatory, or feasibility claims, make relevant research and evidence the primary basis. Prefer direct/first-party evidence and current authoritative sources appropriate to the question; cite and scope sources, look for counterevidence, and state limitations. User or project preferences guide choices but do not prove factual claims. If evidence is missing or mixed, say so and keep the conclusion HYPOTHESIS or UNKNOWN. Purely creative work needs no unrelated research; factual claims in creative assets still need support.\r\n"
}