How to write a short-form video brief.

Name the job of the video

Write one sentence describing the audience, the intended message and the next action. “Explain how the refill works to a first-time buyer” gives the editor a clearer task than “make this go viral.” Keep the core message stable when comparing different openings.

• Audience and their current question
• One message and an approved call to action
• Claims or phrases that require review

List the material and constraints

Identify the source assets, ownership or usage permission, useful time ranges and any footage that must not appear. Record the target formats, caption style, safe areas and maximum duration. If several outputs are needed, name the intended purpose of each version.

Illustrative photography / not customer work

Agree what finished means

Name the reviewer, review deadline and number of revision rounds. Define the required export formats and naming convention. A fictional example: Campaign A needs three vertical candidate cuts, one review round and two approved exports. The numbers describe a brief, not a ViralCLI plan or guaranteed output.

Write the message before the shot list

State the one thing the viewer should understand, then identify the approved footage that can communicate it. A useful brief names the audience, the message, the required context and the action the creative should support. Avoid treating a list of transitions or effects as the brief: those choices should follow the idea rather than replace it.

Make revision criteria part of the brief

Write down what the reviewer will check: message accuracy, opening clarity, quote context, caption legibility and the required formats. Name the person who resolves disagreements. Include a sample file naming convention and a place for usage notes. This makes the brief useful at the end of the work, not only at the beginning.

Try it on one small piece of work.

Choose one approved source and write a single audience question. Describe two opening directions while keeping the core message fixed. Ask a reviewer to explain the difference without seeing the original conversation. If they cannot identify what changed, rewrite the candidate descriptions before producing more versions.

This exercise is deliberately bounded. The point is to check whether the brief and review language carry enough context, not to produce the largest possible package. Once the structure is clear, add the required frame and caption checks. Keep the approval reference with the selected revision so the next owner receives both the asset and the decision.

Questions for the person reviewing the handoff.

• Can I trace this version to an approved source?
• Does the cut preserve the intended message and context?
• Are captions, frames and usage notes ready for the destination?
• Who actually approved the selected revision?

The reviewer should be able to answer these questions from the handoff itself. Add a missing source reference or a clear unknown rather than relying on a verbal explanation that disappears after the meeting.