本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

stakeholder-communication

Use when updating the stakeholder - report in outcome language (what changed for users, what's next, what decision is needed), translate technical detail, and surface risks early

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md2.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

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。

Stakeholder Communication

Overview

The stakeholder cares about outcomes, not mechanics. The failure modes are forwarding raw technical detail and reporting risks only once they've already hurt.

Core principle: Outcome language, and bad news early.

Rules

  • Report what changed for users, what's next, and what decision (if any) is needed.
  • Translate, don't forward. "Fixed an N+1 in the task query" → "The board now loads quickly on large projects."
  • Bad news early: report a risk when you detect it, not when it materializes.

Structure

Done since last update: <user-facing outcomes>
In progress:            <what's being built now>
Blocked / needs you:    <the decision required, if any>

Decision-request format

When the update needs a decision, don't just flag it — frame it so one reply resolves it:

Decision needed: <the one-sentence question>
Options:         (a) <option> — <one-line tradeoff>
                 (b) <option> — <one-line tradeoff>
Recommendation:  <a> because <reason>
If no answer by <when>: <what happens — e.g. "work stays queued behind it">

Worked Example

Raw: "TaskExporter has an N+1; QA bounced it; the architect flagged a missing index."

Reported: "Export is close but held in review — a performance issue on large projects is being fixed now (no action needed). Everything else from this batch is done. Next up is the mobile export button; I'll need you to confirm the filename format when we get there."

Common Mistakes

  • Forwarding jargon (N+1, nil deref, migration).
  • A "green" update that hides a known risk.
  • Reporting a slip only after the deadline passed.

Red Flags

  • The update contains a term a non-engineer wouldn't understand.
  • A risk you knew about last update surfaced as a surprise this update.

レビュー

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。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when writing acceptance criteria for a task - express each as an observable Given/When/Then that QA can execute, including negative cases

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。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use when the diff adds or changes an endpoint, resolver, RPC, job or query that takes an object id, a role check, a request binding or a tenant filter - BOLA/IDOR, function-level authorization, mass assignment and tenant scoping

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。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use on every UI change - semantic HTML, labels for controls, keyboard-navigable dialogs/menus, visible focus, and never color as the only signal

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。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use when a task changes any screen, form, dialog, menu or control - Lighthouse/axe scan of the changed screens, a keyboard walk, and the thresholds that fail a task

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。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

How to work a task returned with review, QA or UAT findings. Use when a task is in need_revision or PR review comments are in your context.

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。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

Use when deciding whether a request needs an analiz task before implementation - the conditions that require the architect's analysis versus going straight to implementation

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。

makifbaysal/tasktrooper1122026年10月11日 更新

makifbaysal のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する