本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

stakeholder-intake

Use when a stakeholder sends a request - route it to backlog tasks, an analiz task, or a focused question, decide ask-vs-assume with a Definition of Ready, and ask only what a wrong guess would actually cost

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.5 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 Intake

Overview

A stakeholder request is raw intent. Your job is to convert it into the right board action without over-asking or guessing. The two failure modes are asking questions the request already answers (or that a read tool or an analiz task could answer) and creating implementation tasks before the approach is understood.

Core principle: Look it up first. Ask only when a wrong guess would cost more than a revision cycle. Otherwise assume, write the assumption down, and move.

Routing order

  1. Can a read tool answer it? list_repositories, list_projects, list_board_tasks, get_board_summary, list_team — look it up, never ask.
  2. A product decision blocks ALL work (see the ask-vs-assume rule below)? → ask_user.
  3. Technical approach unknown? → an analiz task to system-architect, todo (always safe to start, no approval needed).
  4. Otherwise → create the backlog tasks.
  5. Partially clear? → create the tasks that are clear now, and ask only about the one blocking unknown — never hold everything hostage to one open question.

Ask-vs-assume rule

Ask a product question only when all three hold:

  • (a) the answer changes a Then-clause or the Out-of-scope line of what you're about to create;
  • (b) there are several reasonable answers and no safe default;
  • (c) a wrong guess costs more than one revision cycle.

Typical cases that clear the bar: who may see or do something, money and pricing, legal or compliance copy, data deletion or retention, brand identity for a new product, an irreversible migration.

Otherwise assume — write the assumption under Assumptions: in the task description and list it in your approval message to the stakeholder, so they can correct it cheaply instead of you asking for it expensively.

Reasonable defaults — never ask about these

  • The existing app's auth and design system.
  • Friendly error messages, in the content language.
  • Responsive from 360px to 1440px.
  • Loading/empty/error states are present.
  • The existing app's own conventions for pagination, dates and units.

Look it up before you ask

Repository/codebase access, which repos or projects exist, board contents and team members are system facts — call list_repositories, list_projects, list_board_tasks, get_board_summary or list_team first, never the stakeholder.

Registered repositories are already checked out and fully accessible to the team — never ask for repo URLs, git/CMS credentials, or a contact for the dev team; the agent team IS the dev team. If a named product has no repository yet, create a board task to set one up instead of asking.

❌ "Does the team already have access to the Acme repository, or do we need repo/CMS credentials?" — list_repositories answers this. ✅ list_repositories → repo acme-web exists → proceed. Not listed → create a task to register the repo, then ask only the product question that's still open.

Forbidden question topics (incident lessons — never ask these, look them up or route them instead):

  • Developer skills or personal technical ability.
  • DIY builders, or which platform the stakeholder will personally host or use.
  • Technical implementation choices — route to an analiz task for the architect.
  • Repository or codebase access, repo URLs, git hosting, CMS logins, deploy credentials, or "who is your dev team / who can we contact" — the platform holds the access and the agent team IS the dev team.
  • Anything already visible on the board.

Red-flag phrases in a draft question: "do you have access", "repo URL", "credentials", "your dev team" — any of these means you should be calling a tool, not asking.

Question craft (for ask_user)

  • Choice mode with 2–4 concrete options, the recommended one first and labelled "(recommended)".
  • A one-sentence "why it matters" in context.
  • Text mode only for URLs and copy the stakeholder must supply verbatim.
  • Never a question about a stylistic preference — draft it yourself (see implementation-task-spec's design brief).
  • At most 3 questions per call. After answers arrive, act immediately — never re-ask the same topic.

Definition of Ready

Before a task leaves backlog, it has:

  • a concrete persona and outcome in the user story;
  • every criterion passing the testability gate (acceptance-criteria-gwt);
  • a negative/edge criterion where the feature takes input or checks permission;
  • an Out of Scope line;
  • a design brief, for UI work;
  • repository, project, assignee and task_type set;
  • its order declared with blocked_by / deploy_depends_on, not implied in prose;
  • its assumptions listed.

Worked Examples

  • "Refresh the Acme website." → list_repositories finds acme-web; get_repo_tree finds an existing design system → no question, write "follow the existing design system", draft the real copy yourself, list assumptions (e.g. "assuming the current page structure stays, only visuals and copy refresh").
  • "We need reporting." → Vague, but is it a product or technical unknown? The scope of "reporting" is a product decision that blocks all work → ask_user: "Which report unblocks you first: (a) tasks-per-project, (b) throughput over time, (c) per-assignee load? (a recommended — most requested type)". Once they pick, the how (query? materialized view?) is a technical unknown → analiz task, not more stakeholder questions.

Common Mistakes

  • Asking the stakeholder a technical question the architect/code should answer.
  • Creating implementation tasks for an unclear approach instead of an analiz task.
  • Asking what a reasonable default already covers.
  • Question lists in chat instead of ask_user.
  • Re-asking something already answered.
  • Burying an assumption in technical_description instead of the description's Assumptions: line.

Red Flags

  • More than 3 questions in one call, or any non-product (technical) question to the stakeholder.
  • Implementation tasks created before the approach is understood.
  • The question contains "do you have access", "repo URL", "credentials", or "your dev team".
  • A 4th question when 3 would do.

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