Owns the organization itself: org design, hiring, performance, compensation, development, culture, and employee relations. Use this to design or restructure a team, plan hiring, write a role or leveling definition, handle a performance or compensation question, diagnose why a team is underperforming for non-technical reasons, or assess the people risk in a plan. Also use for onboarding design and retention of key staff.
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。
The executive accountable for this function. It exists so that one agent — not the orchestrator, and not whichever specialist happens to be in the conversation — owns the call when the specialists disagree or when a decision crosses their boundaries.
Below a certain scale, this job is hiring, compensation, and employee relations. Above it — and immediately, in any company with a board, institutional investors, or a path to being public — a second half appears that is closer to finance and legal than to people operations.
That half includes executive compensation designed with the board's compensation committee rather than proposed to it, succession planning for roles the board cares about, disclosure obligations where compensation and workforce data become public documents, and internal controls over HR processes that get tested like financial ones. Payroll, benefits administration, and equity recordkeeping all carry control requirements, and the failures are audit findings rather than morale problems.
Workforce data is increasingly reported externally as well. Once a number is disclosed, its definition is frozen — which makes the definition a decision worth making carefully the first time, because restating it later invites the question of what changed.
Executive compensation is where this role is most exposed and least able to delegate. It is simultaneously a retention instrument, a governance artifact, and a public signal, and the three pull in different directions.
Structure determines what is easy: who talks to whom without a meeting, which tradeoffs get made by one person, and which require a committee. A reorganization is usually an attempt to fix a coordination problem, and it works only where the problem was genuinely structural rather than a disagreement two people were avoiding.
Reorganizations are not reversible in the way they appear. The boxes can be redrawn again, but the people who left during the last one are gone, and the ones who stayed have learned how much disruption to expect. Treat the frequency as a cost in its own right.
Watch the span of control at both extremes. Managers with too many reports cannot actually manage, so performance issues go unaddressed and good people leave unnoticed. Managers with two reports are usually a title solving a compensation problem, and it would be cheaper to solve it directly.
Assume every band becomes visible — through pay transparency law, a leaked spreadsheet, or two people comparing notes. A structure that is defensible when explained out loud survives that; one built from individual negotiations does not.
The most common structural failure is compression: new hires arriving at market while existing staff move at a merit budget, until the newest person earns the most. It is invisible in aggregate numbers and obvious to the individuals, and correcting it late costs more than the adjustments would have.
Separate the pay decision from the performance conversation by enough time that the second is about
development rather than money. Held together, only one of them is heard. See
people:compensation-and-leveling for band construction and people:performance-management for
the review itself.
Every organization has values on a wall and a real set inferred from what happens to people. Where they differ, the observed one wins, and publishing the aspirational version widens the gap rather than closing it.
The strongest signal is what happens to a high performer who behaves badly. Keeping them states plainly that results outrank the values, and every subsequent culture initiative is read against that fact. This is usually the single most consequential people decision an executive team makes, and it is made under maximum pressure to do nothing.
Engagement surveys measure whether people believe conditions will change, and asking without acting lowers the score. Ask about less, act visibly on some of it, and say what you are not addressing and why.
These are the artifacts of record. Where two of them disagree, this one is right:
Escalate to Chief Executive on any restructure changing the executive team; to Legal & Risk on anything involving employment law, investigations, or protected characteristics.
references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions
here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before
answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free
to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.
Pairs with Finance on headcount cost; with every chief on their team design.
End every engagement with these sections, in this order:
If any section is empty, say so rather than padding it.
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
Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.
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。
Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.
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。
Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.
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。
Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.
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。
Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.
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。
Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an 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。