claude-code-arcane 1.0.0

package/skills/content-production/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,192 @@
+---
+name: content-production
+description: "Full content production pipeline — research, brief, draft, optimize, and publish blog posts, articles, and guides end-to-end."
+argument-hint: ""
+category: "marketing-content"
+user-invocable: true
+allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Bash, Write, Edit
+---
+
+# Content Production
+
+You are an expert content producer with deep experience across B2B SaaS, developer tools, and technical audiences. Your goal is to take a topic from zero to a finished, optimized piece that ranks, converts, and actually gets read.
+
+This is the execution engine — not the strategy layer. You're here to build, not plan.
+
+## Before Starting
+
+**Check for context first:**
+If `marketing-context.md` exists, read it before asking questions. It contains brand voice, target audience, keyword targets, and writing examples. Use what's there — only ask for what's missing.
+
+Gather this context (ask in one shot, don't drip):
+
+### What you need
+- **Topic / working title** — what are we writing about?
+- **Target keyword** — primary search term (if SEO matters)
+- **Audience** — who reads this and what do they already know?
+- **Goal** — inform, convert, build authority, drive trial?
+- **Approximate length** — 800 words? 2,000 words? Long-form?
+- **Existing content** — do we have pieces this should link to?
+
+If the topic is vague ("write about AI"), push back: "Give me the specific angle — who's the reader, what problem are they solving?"
+
+## How This Skill Works
+
+Three modes. Start at whichever fits:
+
+### Mode 1: Research & Brief
+You have a topic but no content yet. Do the research, map the competitive landscape, define the angle, and produce a content brief before writing a word.
+
+### Mode 2: Draft
+Brief exists (either provided or from Mode 1). Write the full piece — intro, body, conclusion, headers — following the brief's structure and targeting parameters.
+
+### Mode 3: Optimize & Polish
+Draft exists. Run the full optimization pass: SEO signals, readability, structure audit, meta tags, internal links, quality gates. Output a publish-ready version.
+
+You can run all 3 in sequence or jump directly to any mode.
+
+---
+
+## Mode 1: Research & Brief
+
+### Step 1 — Competitive Content Analysis
+
+Before writing, understand what already ranks. For the target keyword:
+
+1. Identify the top 5-10 ranking pieces
+2. Map their angles: Are they listicles? How-tos? Opinion pieces? Comparisons?
+3. Find the gap: What's missing from the existing content? What angle is underserved?
+4. Check search intent: Is the person trying to learn, compare, buy, or solve a specific problem?
+
+**Intent signals:**
+| SERP Pattern | Intent | What to write |
+|---|---|---|
+| "What is / How to" dominate | Informational | Comprehensive guide or explainer |
+| Product pages, reviews | Commercial | Comparison or buyer's guide |
+| News, updates | Navigational/news | Skip unless you have unique angle |
+| Forum results (Reddit, Quora) | Discovery | Opinionated piece with real perspective |
+
+### Step 2 — Source Gathering
+
+Collect 3-5 credible, citable sources before drafting. Prioritize:
+- Original research (studies, surveys, reports)
+- Official documentation
+- Expert quotes you can attribute
+- Data with specific numbers (not vague claims)
+
+**Rule:** If you can't cite a specific number, don't make a vague claim. "Studies show" is a red flag. Find the actual study.
+
+### Step 3 — Produce the Content Brief
+
+Fill in the [Content Brief Template](templates/content-brief-template.md). The brief defines:
+- Target keyword + secondary keywords
+- Reader profile and their job-to-be-done
+- Angle and unique point of view
+- Required sections and H2 structure
+- Key claims to prove
+- Internal links to include
+- Competitive pieces to beat
+
+See [references/content-brief-guide.md](references/content-brief-guide.md) for how to write a brief that actually produces better drafts.
+
+---
+
+## Mode 2: Draft
+
+You have a brief. Now write.
+
+### Outline First
+
+Build the header skeleton before filling in prose. A good outline:
+- Has a hook-worthy H1 (keyword-included, curiosity-driving)
+- Has 4-7 H2 sections that follow a logical progression
+- Uses H3s sparingly — only when a section genuinely needs subdivision
+- Ends with a CTA-adjacent conclusion
+
+Don't over-engineer the outline. If you're stuck on structure for more than 5 minutes, start writing and restructure later.
+
+### Intro Principles
+
+The intro has one job: make the reader believe this piece will answer their question. Get there in 3-4 sentences.
+
+Formula that works:
+1. Name the problem or situation the reader is in
+2. Name what this piece does about it
+3. Optionally: give them a reason to trust you on this topic
+
+**What to avoid:**
+- Starting with "In today's digital landscape..." (everyone does this)
+- Starting with a question unless it's genuinely sharp
+- Burying the point under 3 sentences of context-setting
+
+### Section-by-Section Approach
+
+For each H2 section:
+1. State the main point in the first sentence (don't save it for the end)
+2. Prove it with an example, stat, or comparison
+3. Add one actionable takeaway before moving on
+
+Readers skim. Every section should deliver value on its own.
+
+### Conclusion
+
+Three elements:
+1. Summary of the core argument (1-2 sentences)
+2. The single most important thing to do next
+3. CTA (if relevant to the goal)
+
+Don't pad the conclusion. If it's done, it's done.
+
+---
+
+## Mode 3: Optimize & Polish
+
+Draft exists. Run SEO pass (title tag, H1, H2s, first paragraph keyword, image alt text, URL slug), readability pass (sentence length, paragraph length, active voice), structure audit, internal links (2-4 minimum), and meta tags.
+
+See [references/optimization-checklist.md](references/optimization-checklist.md) for the full pre-publish checklist and quality gates.
+
+---
+
+## Proactive Triggers
+
+Flag these without being asked:
+
+- **Thin content risk** — If the target keyword has high-authority competitors with 2,000+ word pieces, a 600-word post won't rank. Surface this upfront, before drafting starts.
+- **Keyword cannibalization** — If existing content already targets this keyword, flag it. Publishing a second piece splits authority instead of building it.
+- **Intent mismatch** — If the requested angle doesn't match search intent (e.g., writing a brand awareness piece for a transactional keyword), call it out. The piece will get traffic that doesn't convert.
+- **Missing sources** — If the draft contains claims like "many companies" or "studies show" without citation, flag each one before the piece ships.
+- **CTA/goal disconnect** — If the piece's goal is "drive trial signups" but there's no CTA, or the CTA is buried at paragraph 12, flag it.
+
+---
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+| When you ask for... | You get... |
+|---|---|
+| Research & brief | Completed content brief: keyword targets, audience, angle, H2 structure, sources, competitive gaps |
+| Full draft | Complete article with H1, H2s, intro, body, conclusion, and inline source markers |
+| SEO optimization | Annotated draft with title tag, meta description, keyword placement audit, and OG copy |
+| Readability audit | Scorer output + specific sentence-level edits flagged |
+| Publish checklist | Completed gate checklist with pass/fail on each item |
+
+---
+
+## Communication
+
+All output follows the structured standard:
+- **Bottom line first** — answer before explanation
+- **What + Why + How** — every finding includes all three
+- **Actions have owners and deadlines** — no "we should probably..."
+- **Confidence tagging** — 🟢 verified / 🟡 medium / 🔴 assumed
+
+When reviewing drafts: flag issues → explain impact → give specific fix. Don't just say "improve readability." Say: "Paragraph 3 averages 32 words per sentence. Break the second sentence into two."
+
+---
+
+## Related Skills
+
+- **content-strategy**: Use when deciding *what* to write — topics, calendar, pillar structure. NOT for writing the actual piece (that's this skill).
+- **content-humanizer**: Use after drafting when the piece sounds robotic or AI-generated. Run this before the optimization pass.
+- **ai-seo**: Use when optimizing specifically for AI search citation (ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews) in addition to traditional SEO.
+- **copywriting**: Use for landing pages, CTAs, and conversion copy. NOT for long-form content (that's this skill).
+- **seo-audit**: Use when auditing an existing content library for SEO gaps. NOT for single-piece production.

package/skills/content-production/references/content-brief-guide.md

@@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
+# Content Brief Guide
+
+A brief isn't a writing assignment. It's a contract between the strategist and the writer — and when you're both the same person, it's still the contract between your thinking brain and your writing brain. Skip it and you'll rewrite. Do it right and the draft almost writes itself.
+
+---
+
+## Why Briefs Fail (and How to Fix Them)
+
+Most briefs are too vague. They say "write about email marketing" without telling the writer:
+- What's the specific angle?
+- Who's the reader?
+- What keywords matter?
+- What tone?
+- What should the reader do after?
+
+The result: a draft that misses the mark on every axis.
+
+**The fix:** Every field in the brief should be specific enough that two different writers would produce the same piece.
+
+---
+
+## The Most Important Field: Angle
+
+The angle is the single most critical field in the brief. It's your differentiated take — not just "write about email marketing" but "why most email open rate benchmarks are useless and what to measure instead."
+
+**A good angle is:**
+- One sentence
+- Opinionated (takes a position)
+- Different from what already ranks
+- Grounded in something you actually know or have data on
+
+**A weak angle is:**
+- "Comprehensive guide to email marketing"
+- "Everything you need to know about..."
+- "Best practices for..."
+
+If your angle sounds like a Wikipedia article, it's not an angle.
+
+---
+
+## Keyword Targeting: What Actually Matters
+
+You don't need to stuff the brief with 20 keywords. You need:
+
+1. **One primary keyword** — the main search term this piece is targeting. Every SEO decision flows from this.
+2. **2-4 secondary keywords** — related phrases that appear naturally. These expand coverage without forcing it.
+
+**How to find secondary keywords:**
+- Look at "People Also Ask" on the SERP for your primary term
+- Check what related terms appear in the top-ranking articles
+- Use autocomplete on the search bar for your primary term
+
+**Common mistake:** Targeting a keyword that's informational (someone learning) with a piece that's commercial (someone buying). Match intent or waste the effort.
+
+---
+
+## The Competitive Gap: Finding the Opening
+
+Before writing the brief's angle, look at what's ranking. You're not copying them — you're finding what they missed.
+
+**Gap patterns to look for:**
+
+| Pattern | What It Means | Opportunity |
+|---|---|---|
+| All top pieces are listicles | No deep explanation exists | Write the definitive guide |
+| Top pieces are outdated (2+ years old) | Information is stale | Write the current-year version with updated data |
+| Top pieces are generic (no real examples) | Theory without practice | Write a practitioner piece with real cases |
+| Top pieces are all from the same POV | Perspective monopoly | Write the contrarian or underdog angle |
+| Top pieces are very long but shallow | Word count without depth | Write shorter but genuinely useful |
+
+The gap is your angle. Find it before you brief.
+
+---
+
+## Structure: H2s Are the Real Deliverable
+
+Writers often write vague outlines. "Introduction. Section 1. Conclusion." That's not a structure — that's a placeholder.
+
+Good H2s do three things:
+1. **Promise value** — the reader knows what they'll learn
+2. **Follow logic** — each section flows from the previous
+3. **Hit keywords** — secondary terms appear naturally
+
+**Building the H2 structure:**
+- Write the outline as if you're writing the table of contents for a useful reference book
+- Each H2 should be a complete thought ("How to Write Subject Lines That Get Opened" not "Subject Lines")
+- Sequence matters: don't put "Advanced Tactics" before "Why This Matters"
+
+**The rule of 5:** Most blog posts need 4-6 H2s. Fewer and it's shallow. More and it's scattered.
+
+---
+
+## Sources: Non-Negotiable Before Drafting
+
+Writers who draft without sources invent claims. Then those claims go live on your website.
+
+**Minimum brief requirement:** 3 sources with specific data points or quotes identified.
+
+**Source quality hierarchy:**
+1. Original research (surveys, studies, experiments you conducted)
+2. Credible third-party research (academic papers, industry reports from named organizations)
+3. Expert quotes (attributed, verifiable)
+4. Strong case studies with specific metrics
+5. Official documentation or standards
+
+**Red flag sources:** Anything that cites "a study" without naming it. Anything more than 5 years old in a fast-moving category. Competitor blog posts (they're also making stuff up).
+
+---
+
+## Internal Linking: Plan It Before, Not After
+
+Most writers add internal links as an afterthought. This produces one problem: they link to whatever they remember, not what's most valuable.
+
+The brief should specify:
+- 2-3 existing pieces this article should link to (and what anchor text to use)
+- 1-2 existing pages that should link back to this article once published
+
+This prevents both orphaned content and missed link equity.
+
+---
+
+## Success Criteria: If You Don't Define It, You Can't Measure It
+
+Every brief should answer: how will we know this piece worked?
+
+Not vague ("gets traffic") — specific:
+- Ranks in top 5 for [keyword] within [timeframe]
+- Drives X leads per month
+- Achieves X% conversion rate on the CTA
+- Gets cited / linked by [type of site]
+
+Define it now so you don't change the definition later.
+
+---
+
+## Brief Anti-Patterns
+
+| Anti-pattern | Problem | Fix |
+|---|---|---|
+| "Write a comprehensive guide" | No angle, no differentiation | Define the specific take |
+| Missing audience definition | Writer guesses; often wrong | Name the exact reader job title and pain |
+| No sources listed | Writer invents facts | Find 3 sources before briefing |
+| Vague keyword ("marketing") | No SEO targeting | Get specific: "email marketing for B2B SaaS" |
+| H2s that are just topic labels | No promise, no structure | Rewrite as complete-thought headers |
+| No internal links specified | Orphaned content | List 2-3 links before writing |
+| No success criteria | Can't evaluate performance | Define at least one measurable outcome |

package/skills/content-production/references/optimization-checklist.md

@@ -0,0 +1,139 @@
+# Pre-Publish Optimization Checklist
+
+Run this before every piece goes live. Each section is a gate — fail a gate, fix it before moving on.
+
+---
+
+## Gate 1: SEO Signals
+
+### Title & Headers
+- [ ] H1 contains primary keyword (naturally, not forced)
+- [ ] H1 is ≤70 characters
+- [ ] At least 2 H2s contain secondary keywords or related phrases
+- [ ] No two H2s are duplicates or near-duplicates
+- [ ] H1 differs from the title tag (they can overlap but shouldn't be identical)
+
+### Keyword Presence
+- [ ] Primary keyword appears in the first 100 words
+- [ ] Primary keyword appears 3-5 times total (not more — stuffing tanks rankings)
+- [ ] Keyword variations appear naturally throughout
+- [ ] No keyword stuffing (reading it aloud sounds natural)
+
+### Meta & Technical
+- [ ] Title tag: 50-60 characters, keyword-first where possible
+- [ ] Meta description: 150-160 characters, includes keyword, ends with hook or action
+- [ ] URL slug: short, keyword-first, lowercase, hyphens not underscores
+- [ ] Canonical URL is set
+- [ ] OG title and OG description written for social sharing
+
+### Images & Media
+- [ ] At least one image present
+- [ ] All images have descriptive alt text (keyword included where natural)
+- [ ] Images are compressed (under 200KB each)
+- [ ] Image filenames are descriptive (not IMG_4832.jpg)
+
+---
+
+## Gate 2: Readability
+
+### Score
+- [ ] Flesch Reading Ease score ≥ 60 (aim for 60-70 for professional audience; 70+ for general)
+- [ ] Run `scripts/content_scorer.py` — overall score ≥ 70
+
+### Sentence & Paragraph Structure
+- [ ] Average sentence length ≤ 20 words
+- [ ] No single paragraph exceeds 4 sentences
+- [ ] No sentence exceeds 35 words (check and break if found)
+- [ ] Sentence length varies — not all short, not all long
+
+### Voice & Clarity
+- [ ] Active voice dominant (passive voice < 20% of sentences)
+- [ ] No weasel words ("very," "really," "quite," "somewhat")
+- [ ] No jargon without explanation (for non-expert audiences)
+- [ ] All acronyms spelled out on first use
+- [ ] Contractions used where natural (improves readability)
+
+---
+
+## Gate 3: Structure & Content Quality
+
+### Opening
+- [ ] Intro is ≤150 words
+- [ ] Intro does not start with "In today's..." or "Welcome to..."
+- [ ] Intro names the reader's problem or situation within the first 2 sentences
+- [ ] Intro clearly signals what the reader will get from this piece
+- [ ] No false promise in the intro (piece delivers what it hints at)
+
+### Body
+- [ ] Every H2 section leads with its main point (buried leads = reader drop-off)
+- [ ] At least 2 concrete examples, case studies, or data points
+- [ ] All statistics and specific claims have citations or are labeled as estimates
+- [ ] No fluff paragraphs (every paragraph earns its place — if removing it changes nothing, cut it)
+- [ ] Visual break (table, list, callout, image) at least every 400 words
+
+### Conclusion
+- [ ] Conclusion ≤150 words
+- [ ] Summarizes the core argument (not just "in conclusion...")
+- [ ] Includes one clear next step or CTA
+- [ ] Doesn't introduce new arguments or ideas
+
+---
+
+## Gate 4: Internal Linking
+
+- [ ] 2-4 internal links to existing content on the site
+- [ ] Anchor text describes the destination (not "click here" or "this article")
+- [ ] Links tested and confirmed working (no 404s)
+- [ ] No excessive linking to the same page multiple times
+- [ ] At least one high-traffic page links to this piece (plan this before publishing)
+
+---
+
+## Gate 5: Factual Accuracy
+
+- [ ] Every statistic cited with source (year + organization)
+- [ ] All external links go to credible sources (not competitors, not thin content)
+- [ ] No claims made without evidence or without "in my experience" qualifier
+- [ ] All product/feature mentions are accurate (check with product team if needed)
+- [ ] Quotes are attributed correctly and not paraphrased beyond recognition
+- [ ] No outdated information — check date-sensitive claims (pricing, regulations, stats)
+
+---
+
+## Gate 6: Brand & Voice
+
+- [ ] Matches brand voice (check `marketing-context.md` if available)
+- [ ] Consistent POV throughout (first person, second person, or third — pick one)
+- [ ] Consistent tense (present or past — don't mix)
+- [ ] No off-brand claims (anything that overpromises, contradicts other content, or sounds unlike us)
+- [ ] CTA aligns with piece goal (don't pitch demo on an informational piece for beginners)
+
+---
+
+## Gate 7: Final Readthrough
+
+Run a final read-aloud. Catch what scanning misses.
+
+- [ ] Read the full piece aloud — anything that makes you stumble, fix it
+- [ ] The piece flows — section to section makes sense without re-reading
+- [ ] The headline still feels earned after reading the piece
+- [ ] You'd share this piece yourself (if not, it's not done)
+- [ ] No placeholder text, formatting artifacts, or draft notes left in
+
+---
+
+## Scoring Summary
+
+| Gate | Status | Notes |
+|---|---|---|
+| SEO Signals | ✅ / ❌ | |
+| Readability | ✅ / ❌ | |
+| Structure & Quality | ✅ / ❌ | |
+| Internal Linking | ✅ / ❌ | |
+| Factual Accuracy | ✅ / ❌ | |
+| Brand & Voice | ✅ / ❌ | |
+| Final Readthrough | ✅ / ❌ | |
+
+**Publish only when all 7 gates are green.**
+
+If you're skipping a gate, document why. Conscious tradeoffs are fine. Unconscious shortcuts aren't.

package/skills/content-production/scripts/brand_voice_analyzer.py

@@ -0,0 +1,197 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env python3
+"""
+Brand Voice Analyzer - Analyzes content to establish and maintain brand voice consistency
+"""
+
+import re
+from typing import Dict, List, Tuple
+import json
+
+class BrandVoiceAnalyzer:
+    def __init__(self):
+        self.voice_dimensions = {
+            'formality': {
+                'formal': ['hereby', 'therefore', 'furthermore', 'pursuant', 'regarding'],
+                'casual': ['hey', 'cool', 'awesome', 'stuff', 'yeah', 'gonna']
+            },
+            'tone': {
+                'professional': ['expertise', 'solution', 'optimize', 'leverage', 'strategic'],
+                'friendly': ['happy', 'excited', 'love', 'enjoy', 'together', 'share']
+            },
+            'perspective': {
+                'authoritative': ['proven', 'research shows', 'experts agree', 'data indicates'],
+                'conversational': ['you might', 'let\'s explore', 'we think', 'imagine if']
+            }
+        }
+    
+    def analyze_text(self, text: str) -> Dict:
+        """Analyze text for brand voice characteristics"""
+        text_lower = text.lower()
+        word_count = len(text.split())
+        
+        results = {
+            'word_count': word_count,
+            'readability_score': self._calculate_readability(text),
+            'voice_profile': {},
+            'sentence_analysis': self._analyze_sentences(text),
+            'recommendations': []
+        }
+        
+        # Analyze voice dimensions
+        for dimension, categories in self.voice_dimensions.items():
+            dim_scores = {}
+            for category, keywords in categories.items():
+                score = sum(1 for keyword in keywords if keyword in text_lower)
+                dim_scores[category] = score
+            
+            # Determine dominant voice
+            if sum(dim_scores.values()) > 0:
+                dominant = max(dim_scores, key=dim_scores.get)
+                results['voice_profile'][dimension] = {
+                    'dominant': dominant,
+                    'scores': dim_scores
+                }
+        
+        # Generate recommendations
+        results['recommendations'] = self._generate_recommendations(results)
+        
+        return results
+    
+    def _calculate_readability(self, text: str) -> float:
+        """Calculate Flesch Reading Ease score"""
+        sentences = re.split(r'[.!?]+', text)
+        words = text.split()
+        syllables = sum(self._count_syllables(word) for word in words)
+        
+        if len(sentences) == 0 or len(words) == 0:
+            return 0
+        
+        avg_sentence_length = len(words) / len(sentences)
+        avg_syllables_per_word = syllables / len(words)
+        
+        # Flesch Reading Ease formula
+        score = 206.835 - 1.015 * avg_sentence_length - 84.6 * avg_syllables_per_word
+        return max(0, min(100, score))
+    
+    def _count_syllables(self, word: str) -> int:
+        """Count syllables in a word (simplified)"""
+        word = word.lower()
+        vowels = 'aeiou'
+        syllable_count = 0
+        previous_was_vowel = False
+        
+        for char in word:
+            is_vowel = char in vowels
+            if is_vowel and not previous_was_vowel:
+                syllable_count += 1
+            previous_was_vowel = is_vowel
+        
+        # Adjust for silent e
+        if word.endswith('e'):
+            syllable_count -= 1
+        
+        return max(1, syllable_count)
+    
+    def _analyze_sentences(self, text: str) -> Dict:
+        """Analyze sentence structure"""
+        sentences = re.split(r'[.!?]+', text)
+        sentences = [s.strip() for s in sentences if s.strip()]
+        
+        if not sentences:
+            return {'average_length': 0, 'variety': 'low'}
+        
+        lengths = [len(s.split()) for s in sentences]
+        avg_length = sum(lengths) / len(lengths) if lengths else 0
+        
+        # Calculate variety
+        if len(set(lengths)) < 3:
+            variety = 'low'
+        elif len(set(lengths)) < 5:
+            variety = 'medium'
+        else:
+            variety = 'high'
+        
+        return {
+            'average_length': round(avg_length, 1),
+            'variety': variety,
+            'count': len(sentences)
+        }
+    
+    def _generate_recommendations(self, analysis: Dict) -> List[str]:
+        """Generate recommendations based on analysis"""
+        recommendations = []
+        
+        # Readability recommendations
+        if analysis['readability_score'] < 30:
+            recommendations.append("Consider simplifying language for better readability")
+        elif analysis['readability_score'] > 70:
+            recommendations.append("Content is very easy to read - consider if this matches your audience")
+        
+        # Sentence variety
+        if analysis['sentence_analysis']['variety'] == 'low':
+            recommendations.append("Vary sentence length for better flow and engagement")
+        
+        # Voice consistency
+        if analysis['voice_profile']:
+            recommendations.append("Maintain consistent voice across all content")
+        
+        return recommendations
+
+def analyze_content(content: str, output_format: str = 'json') -> str:
+    """Main function to analyze content"""
+    analyzer = BrandVoiceAnalyzer()
+    results = analyzer.analyze_text(content)
+    
+    if output_format == 'json':
+        return json.dumps(results, indent=2)
+    else:
+        # Human-readable format
+        output = [
+            f"=== Brand Voice Analysis ===",
+            f"Word Count: {results['word_count']}",
+            f"Readability Score: {results['readability_score']:.1f}/100",
+            f"",
+            f"Voice Profile:"
+        ]
+        
+        for dimension, profile in results['voice_profile'].items():
+            output.append(f"  {dimension.title()}: {profile['dominant']}")
+        
+        output.extend([
+            f"",
+            f"Sentence Analysis:",
+            f"  Average Length: {results['sentence_analysis']['average_length']} words",
+            f"  Variety: {results['sentence_analysis']['variety']}",
+            f"  Total Sentences: {results['sentence_analysis']['count']}",
+            f"",
+            f"Recommendations:"
+        ])
+        
+        for rec in results['recommendations']:
+            output.append(f"  • {rec}")
+        
+        return '\n'.join(output)
+
+if __name__ == "__main__":
+    import sys
+    import argparse
+
+    parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(
+        description="Brand Voice Analyzer - Analyzes content to establish and maintain brand voice consistency"
+    )
+    parser.add_argument(
+        "file", nargs="?", default=None,
+        help="Text file to analyze"
+    )
+    parser.add_argument(
+        "--format", choices=["json", "text"], default="text",
+        help="Output format (default: text)"
+    )
+    args = parser.parse_args()
+
+    if args.file:
+        with open(args.file, 'r') as f:
+            content = f.read()
+        print(analyze_content(content, args.format))
+    else:
+        print("Usage: python brand_voice_analyzer.py <file> [--format json|text]")