---
name: brand-visual-language
description: A brand's visual tone — playful or serious, rounded or angular — should be consistent across all UI elements. Shape language in typography, border-radius, and iconography communicates personality before a single word is read. Use when establishing a design system, choosing icon libraries, setting border-radius tokens, or reviewing visual consistency.
metadata:
  priority: 7
  pathPatterns:
    - "**/*.css"
    - "**/*.scss"
    - "**/tokens/**"
    - "**/theme/**"
    - "tailwind.config.*"
    - "design-system/**"
    - "components/**"
  promptSignals:
    phrases:
      - "brand tone"
      - "visual language"
      - "rounded"
      - "angular"
      - "icon style"
      - "border radius"
      - "playful"
      - "serious"
      - "brand personality"
retrieval:
  aliases:
    - brand visual language
    - shape language
    - brand tone
    - rounded vs angular
    - icon style
    - visual personality
  intents:
    - establish brand visual style
    - choose border radius
    - pick icon library
    - match ui to brand personality
    - make design feel consistent
  examples:
    - should we use rounded or sharp corners
    - what icon style fits this brand
    - make the UI feel more playful
    - this feels too corporate, how do I soften it
---

# Brand Visual Language

Visual shape communicates personality. A rounded corner says something different to the user than a sharp one — and that message arrives before they read a single word. The shapes in typography, border-radius, and iconography should tell a consistent story.

## Shape Language

| Shape | Tone | Associated with |
|---|---|---|
| **Rounded, pill-shaped** | Friendly, approachable, playful, modern | Consumer apps, health, kids, lifestyle, social |
| **Softly rounded (8–12px)** | Professional, warm, accessible | SaaS, productivity, general B2B |
| **Lightly rounded (2–4px)** | Precise, structured, efficient | Enterprise tools, finance, data platforms |
| **Sharp / no radius** | Technical, serious, authoritative | Developer tools, security, industrial |

Every component — cards, inputs, modals, badges — should follow the same radius logic.

## Radius for Large Surfaces

The perceived "roundedness" of an element changes with its scale. A radius that looks soft on a button may look sharp on a large container.

- **Large Cards & Modals:** Typically use a larger radius than buttons (e.g., if buttons are 4px, large cards might be 8px or 12px) to maintain a consistent visual tone.
- **Wells and Background Sections:** For large background areas or "wells," a smaller radius (2px–8px) is often used to provide structure and define the region without making it feel like a "floating" component. This keeps the focus on the content within, rather than the container itself.

## Reading Shape from an Existing Brand

Before choosing a radius, look at the brand's existing materials:

- **Logo:** Is it rounded, geometric, or angular? The logo's shapes are intentional brand decisions.
- **Product photography or illustration style:** Rounded, bubbly illustrations signal a different personality than sharp, technical diagrams.
- **Typography:** A geometric sans-serif (Circular, Futura) reads differently than a humanist sans (Inter, Söhne) or a sharp editorial serif.
- **Competitor landscape:** Sometimes being the slightly softer option in a sharp market, or the more structured option in a playful market, is the differentiator.

## Typography and Shape

Typeface shapes carry the same tonal signals:

| Type style | Tone |
|---|---|
| Geometric sans (circular letterforms) | Modern, clean, slightly playful |
| Humanist sans (varied stroke widths) | Warm, readable, professional |
| Grotesque sans (neutral, utilitarian) | Serious, efficient, no-frills |
| Serif | Authoritative, established, editorial |
| Rounded sans | Friendly, approachable, informal |
| Monospace | Technical, developer-facing, precise |

The typeface and the border-radius should not contradict each other. A rounded, friendly typeface paired with sharp 0px corners creates visual dissonance.

## Extending Brand Typography

Brand books often specify a display or heading font but leave body text underdefined — a single weight, no reading size, no fallback. This is common with luxury, fashion, or legacy brands where the brand identity was built for print, not screen.

When the brand book is insufficient for UI purposes, extend it deliberately:

**When extension is justified:**
- Brand font has poor legibility at small sizes (display fonts, decorative typefaces)
- Brand font lacks the weights needed for UI hierarchy (no regular, no medium)
- Brand font has no body or reading variant defined
- Brand font loads poorly (performance, licensing, web rendering)

**How to extend:**
- Keep the brand font for headings and display — this is where brand identity lives
- Add a secondary typeface for body text that is **complementary in tone**, not competing
- Match shape language: a geometric brand font pairs with a geometric body font; a humanist display pairs with a humanist body

```
Brand heading font (display, h1–h3): maintains identity
↓
Secondary body font (body, labels, UI copy): legibility and completeness
```

**Pairing principles:**
- Contrast in role, not in personality — the two fonts should feel like they belong to the same product
- Avoid two display fonts or two highly characterful fonts together
- A neutral, high-quality sans (Inter, DM Sans, Söhne) pairs safely with most brand fonts
- If the brand font is a serif, a clean sans body is the natural complement — and vice versa

**Do this sparingly.** Two typefaces is a deliberate extension. Three typefaces is almost always too many. Document the decision and the rationale so future designers do not add a third.

## Iconography

Icon style must match the brand's shape language. Mixing icon styles — some thin, some bold, some filled, some outlined — breaks visual cohesion even when individual icons are correct.

| Icon style | Tone | Use when |
|---|---|---|
| **Thin / outline (1–1.5px stroke)** | Minimal, elegant, refined | Luxury, editorial, premium SaaS |
| **Regular outline (2px stroke)** | Balanced, professional | General SaaS, productivity tools |
| **Bold / thick (2.5–3px stroke)** | Strong, clear, accessible | Consumer apps, mobile-first, accessibility focus |
| **Filled** | Solid, confident, clear at small sizes | Dashboard indicators, status icons, mobile nav |
| **Rounded corners on icon paths** | Friendly, approachable | Consumer, lifestyle, health |
| **Sharp corners on icon paths** | Technical, precise | Developer tools, finance, data |

**Rule:** Use one icon library and one weight throughout. If mixing is unavoidable (e.g. a specialised icon not available in the chosen library), match stroke width and corner style manually.

## Consistency Across Elements

All shape-bearing elements should follow the same visual logic:

| Element | Applies shape language via |
|---|---|
| Buttons | `--radius-button` |
| Cards | `--radius-card` (same or slightly larger than button) |
| Inputs | `--radius-input` (typically same as button) |
| Badges / tags | Can be more rounded than buttons — pill shape is common |
| Modals / drawers | `--radius-modal` (often larger, 12–16px) |
| Avatars | Always fully round (`--radius-full`) |
| Icons | Stroke weight and corner style match brand |
| Illustrations | Shape style consistent with icon style |

## Review Checklist

- [ ] Does the border-radius token match the brand's shape language (logo, illustrations, photography)?
- [ ] Is the same radius logic applied to buttons, inputs, and cards?
- [ ] Does the typeface tone match the overall brand personality?
- [ ] Is a single icon library used consistently throughout?
- [ ] Do icons match the brand in stroke weight (thin for refined, bold for accessible)?
- [ ] Are rounded icon corners used for friendly brands and sharp corners for technical brands?
- [ ] Is the border-radius adjusted for surface size (e.g., larger for modals, tighter 2-8px for wells/backgrounds)?
- [ ] Is there no visual contradiction between typeface style and shape choices (e.g. rounded type + sharp cards)?