Check readability and access

Complete Test the brand in real contexts first.

Brand quality includes whether people can read, understand, and use the assets. This lesson asks you to make a brand readability check, not a vague creative preference. The output should be specific enough that Claude, Canva, Adobe Express, Claude Design, or a designer can use it without guessing.

Here is the before and after: Before, brand review stops at taste. After, contrast, type size, plain copy, alt text needs, and small-screen use are checked before launch. For example, a solo service brand should show who it helps, what promise it makes, what proof supports that promise, and where the identity must appear first. A company brand should add rules for collaborators, templates, and repeated use.

Now try it: Ask Claude to turn the brand examples into a readability and access checklist. Make one choice before asking Claude to write: audience, promise, reference, asset type, tool, launch context, or review risk. That choice keeps the work from turning into generic brand inspiration.

The lesson is done when the artifact can guide a real brand asset and survive one honest review.

Create a readability and access check for this brand kit and examples: [paste]. Include contrast risks, type size, plain-language risks, alt text needs, small-screen risks, and fixes before launch.

If any input is missing, ask me up to three questions before producing the artifact. Then return five sections: Finished Artifact, Realistic Brand Example, Assumptions To Check, What I Should Use In The Next Lesson, and One Risk If I Use This Publicly Without Fixing It. Keep the answer practical enough that I can paste it into my brand working doc.

Finished Artifact:
- a brand readability check
- Why it matters: it gives the brand system a concrete thing to inspect instead of a vague intention.
- Use it next: paste this artifact into the next lesson before asking Claude to write, build, import, publish, or review anything.

Reality Check:
- The artifact names the user, input, decision, owner, or proof it depends on.
- The weakest assumption is visible.
- The next step can be completed in one sitting.

What good looks like

• Contrast and type size are checked.
• Plain-language issues are named.
• Alt text needs are included.
• Small-screen risks are included.

Without rereading the lesson, explain why a brand readability check matters in three bullets. Then apply it to a second brand example: [describe a different solo brand, company, or project]. Return What Changed, What Stayed The Same, What To Check Before Public Use, and the exact next action.

Transfer Check:
- What changed: the second example has a different audience, input, or delivery context.
- What stayed the same: a brand readability check still needs a source, a review check, and a next step.
- Before trusting it: inspect the brand review check that would catch a wrong assumption.
- Next action: run the check once, then carry the revised artifact into the next lesson.

What good looks like

• You explained the lesson idea from memory before applying it again.
• The second example changes the artifact instead of copying the first answer.
• The public-use check names a real risk.
• The next action can be done in one sitting.