In short: write what the protocol does for a user in one sentence with no token in it, then build one belief per audience and a claims register that survives both an audit and a narrative rotation.
Key points
- The token merges investors, community members and customers into one word, so lead with the product truth, token second.
- Holders need to believe the token has a job; if its only job is going up, that is a hope, not a belief.
- No yield numbers in marketing, and no 'safe', 'secure', 'risk-free' or 'guaranteed'.
- Audits are named with firm, scope, date and link; deprecated docs are removed, not archived with a banner.
- The product truth must not contain the current narrative label, such as RWA, AI or restaking.
The token collapses your audiences
Part 2 set the rule: one product truth, a belief per audience. Crypto makes that harder because the token merges the audiences into a single word.
A holder may be an investor, a community member and a customer at the same time. Each wants something different. The investor wants a business. The customer wants a thing that works. The community member wants a reason to stay.
When the deck leads with the token, each reader filters it through their own need. None of them are satisfied. The token story drowns the product story because it is louder and easier to write.
So the order matters. Product truth first. Token second. Always.
One sentence, no token
Write what the protocol does for a user. One sentence. The token is not allowed in it.
The shape is simple: this lets a certain kind of user do a certain thing, without a certain cost or dependency. If you cannot write it, you do not have a product yet. You have an instrument. Some projects are instruments, and that is fine, but say so and position accordingly.
Test the sentence on someone who has never read your docs. If their first question is "and what is the token for", good. That is the second sentence, not the first.
A belief per audience
Each audience needs one belief and one piece of evidence. Not a paragraph. Not a roadmap.
| Audience | What they need to believe | What proves it |
|---|---|---|
| Users | It works and I can exit | Live app, withdrawals working in normal and stressed weeks, a status page that tells the truth |
| Integrators and allocators | Safe to build on or deploy into | Current docs, named and dated audits, incident history, a plain risk page |
| Holders | The token has a job | A written description of what the token does in the system, and what it does not |
| Investors | There is a business under the token | Fees retained, costs, who pays and why (a later part covers the numbers) |
Notice the holder row. "The token has a job" is a product claim, not a price claim. If the only job is "goes up", you do not have a belief. You have a hope, and a later part deals with that.
The claims register, crypto edition
Part 2 introduced the claims register: every public claim, its evidence, its owner, its date. Crypto adds hard lines.
No yield numbers in marketing. None. Not "up to", not "historical", not a screenshot.
No "safe", "secure", "risk-free" or "guaranteed". If legal would not sign the word, do not post it.
Audits are named. Firm, scope, date, link. Components that were not audited are listed too. A vague "audited by leading firms" is a claim with no evidence, which means it is a liability.
Deprecated docs are removed. Not archived with a banner, removed. Stale docs are how an integrator deploys against a contract you retired six months ago.
Every number has an owner and a date. If nobody owns it, it comes down.
Vocabulary and chain choice
Docs, app and deck must use the same names for the same things. "Vault" in the docs, "pool" in the app and "strategy" in the deck reads as three products. An allocator will assume you have three teams who do not talk.
Keep a glossary. One owner. When a name changes, it changes everywhere in the same week.
Chain choice is also a positioning statement, whether you intended it or not. Where you deploy picks your users, your integrators, your liquidity sources and your grant counterparties. Say why in one line. "We are here because our users are here" is positioning. "We are multi-chain" with no primary home is the absence of positioning.
The narrative trap
Labels rotate. RWA, AI, restaking, and whatever is next. A label gets you attention this quarter and makes you a casualty of the rotation the quarter after.
The product truth must not contain the label. Use the label as a door people walk through, not as the foundation they stand on. If the only reason someone would use the protocol is the category it sits in, the protocol is the category's hostage.
Test it the same way as the token. Remove the label from the homepage. Does the first sentence still describe something a user wants?
The checklist
- [ ] One sentence describing what the protocol does for a user, with no token in it
- [ ] One belief and one piece of evidence per audience: users, integrators and allocators, holders, investors
- [ ] Claims register live, with no yields, no "safe", and every audit named, scoped and dated
- [ ] Deprecated docs removed, not banner-archived
- [ ] One glossary; docs, app and deck use identical names
- [ ] One line explaining the chain choice, and a homepage that still makes sense without this quarter's label
Common questions
How should a crypto project explain itself without leading with the token?
Write one sentence describing what the protocol lets a certain user do, without a certain cost or dependency, with no token in it. The token's purpose is the second sentence.
What should a crypto protocol avoid saying in marketing?
Any yield numbers, including 'up to' or historical figures, and words like 'safe', 'secure', 'risk-free' or 'guaranteed'. Vague claims like 'audited by leading firms' are also a liability.
What do integrators and allocators need to see before using a protocol?
Current docs, named and dated audits, incident history and a plain risk page.