/cs:post-mortem <decision> — Honest retrospective on an executed decision, scored against original assumptions and dissent. Closes the strategic sprint loop. Use when a decision hits its 90-day review checkpoint or its kill criteria trigger — e.g. scoring last quarter's pricing change against its pre-committed success metrics.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Command: /cs:post-mortem <decision-path>
Closes the strategic sprint loop. Scores a decision against the success and kill criteria written before the decision (not retro-fitted) and revisits the preserved dissent. This is the rigor that compounds over time.
/cs:office-hours → /cs:brief → /cs:boardroom → /cs:decide → /cs:execute → /cs:post-mortem
↑ you are here
/cs:decide)/cs:decide)/cs:execute)Saved to ~/.claude/postmortems/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md:
# Post-Mortem: <decision title>
**Decision date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Post-mortem date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Status:** WIN / PARTIAL / LOSS / MIXED
## Outcome Scoring (against pre-committed criteria)
| Success Criterion | Threshold | Actual | Met? |
|---|---|---|---|
| <metric 1> | <threshold> | <actual> | ✅ / ❌ |
| <metric 2> | <threshold> | <actual> | ✅ / ❌ |
| Kill Criterion | Threshold | Actual | Triggered? |
|---|---|---|---|
| <metric> | <threshold> | <actual> | ✅ / ❌ |
**Overall:** WIN / PARTIAL / LOSS / MIXED
## What We Got Right
- <factor 1>
- <factor 2>
## What We Got Wrong
- <factor 1>
- <factor 2>
## Preserved Dissent — Revisited
[Original dissent from the boardroom memo, scored:]
- **<dissenter>:** <original concern>
- **Did it materialize?** YES / NO / PARTIAL
- **Cost if YES:** <quantified impact>
- **Lesson:** <one sentence>
## Assumption Audit
[Original brief's assumptions, scored:]
- **Assumption 1:** <text>
- **Held?** YES / NO / PARTIAL
- **Why:** <explanation>
## Process Lessons
- **Phase 2 isolation worked?** YES / NO
- **Devil's advocate concerns played out?** YES / NO / PARTIAL
- **Cadence was right?** YES / TOO LOOSE / TOO TIGHT
## Forward Actions
- [ ] <change to operating system or routing logic>
- [ ] <new decision to make based on this learning>
- [ ] <update company-context.md>
## Status
- WIN → archive, log lesson
- LOSS → schedule follow-up boardroom: `/cs:brief` for the next call
The biggest temptation in post-mortems is retroactive justification: "we always knew X, that's why we did Y." Pre-committed criteria, signed at /cs:decide time, eliminate that move. The numbers either matched or they didn't.
The dissent column from /cs:boardroom is the single most useful piece of organizational memory. Most of the time, the dissenter was directionally right. Revisiting and scoring it builds calibration over years.
/cs:brief — if the post-mortem surfaces a new decision/cs:freeze — if the post-mortem reveals a process gap that needs cooldown enforcementcs-onboarddecision-loggercs-chief-of-staff/em:postmortem — adversarial single-decision post-mortemVersion: 1.0.0
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Accessibility audit skill for scanning, fixing, and verifying WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA compliance across React, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and plain HTML codebases. Use when auditing accessibility, fixing a11y violations, checking color contrast, generating compliance reports, or integrating accessibility checks into CI/CD pipelines.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user needs to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative for paid advertising. Use when they say 'write ad copy,' 'generate headlines,' 'create ad variations,' 'bulk creative,' 'iterate on ads,' 'ad copy validation,' 'RSA headlines,' 'Meta ad copy,' 'LinkedIn ad,' or 'creative testing.' This is pure creative production — distinct from paid-ads (campaign strategy). Use ad-creative when you need the copy, not the campaign plan.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Adversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) skill — optimize content to be cited by AI language models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Mistral) as authoritative sources. Distinct from SEO — AEO optimizes for citation in LLM-generated responses, not search rankings. Use when planning content for AI-first search audiences, auditing existing content for E-E-A-T signals, tracking which pages get cited by which LLMs, or building a citation-friendly content strategy. Triggers — 'AEO audit', 'optimize for ChatGPT', 'get cited by Perplexity', 'LLM citation strategy', 'answer engine optimization', 'content for AI search', 'E-E-A-T audit'. Output is a markdown audit report (default) or JSON for pipeline integration. Stdlib-only Python tools.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Mint a tamper-evident, post-quantum-signed receipt for a consequential agent action (deploy, delete, pay, grant-access, model decision) so it can be verified later from the certificate alone. Use when an autonomous agent takes a side-effecting action that may need to be proven later, or when satisfying EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping. Three decisions: whether an action needs a receipt, minting it, verifying it. Signing is delegated to the open-source OpenAgentOntology package. Not after-the-fact log analysis; not a hosted notary; not a legal opinion.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。