本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

clone-brief

Send your position to a meeting instead of your body — a one-page brief carrying your stances, fallbacks, red lines, tradables, and delegation limits, readable by the colleague (or agent) representing you. Use when you can't attend a decision-making meeting, when double-booked, when briefing someone to negotiate for you, or 'what would you need from me to represent me?'. Produces the clone brief plus a 60-second verbal version for the person carrying it.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.5 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。

Clone Brief Skill

"Sorry, can't make it — can you represent me?" usually transmits a vibe and a prayer. Then your representative gets asked the one question you didn't cover, guesses, and you spend Thursday unwinding it. A clone brief is what should have gone instead of you: your positions with their reasoning, your fallbacks in order, the red lines that end the conversation, what you'd happily trade — and the explicit boundary of what your representative may agree to versus must bring back. One page, readable in two minutes by a colleague, and structured enough that an agent could carry it too. In a world of A2A meetings, this is the artifact that attends.

What This Skill Produces

  • The clone brief: context in three lines, then stances / fallbacks / red lines / tradables / delegation boundary, each with the why attached
  • A 60-second verbal version for briefing the carrier in the corridor
  • A question-anticipation table: the questions likely to come up, with your answers — including the honest "I haven't decided; here's my leaning"
  • A debrief ask: the 3 things you want reported back

Required Inputs

Ask for (if not already provided):

  • The meeting: decision at stake, who's in the room, what they each want (as far as known)
  • Your position and — this is the load-bearing part — why; the reasoning is what lets a representative handle the unanticipated
  • What you'd accept as fallback, what's tradable, what's a walk-away
  • Who carries the brief (peer? report? someone from another team? an agent?) and how much you trust their judgment on this topic

Process

  1. Compress context ruthlessly. Three lines: what's being decided, why it matters to you, where the tension is. The carrier has two minutes; history lessons stay home.
  2. Ladder the positions. For each issue at stake: IDEAL (open with this) → ACCEPTABLE (agree without checking) → BRING BACK (don't agree; capture and return) → RED LINE (say no in the room, with the scripted sentence to say). Attach one-line reasoning to each rung — reasoning is what travels; conclusions alone can't handle follow-ups.
  3. Name the tradables. What you'd concede happily and what you want in exchange — a representative who knows your currency can negotiate; one who only knows your demands can only repeat them.
  4. Draw the delegation boundary explicitly. The sentence that prevents the Thursday unwind: "You may commit up to X; beyond that, 'I'll take it back to [name] by [time]' — that sentence is always a win, never a failure."
  5. Anticipate the questions. The 3–6 things the room will ask, answered. Where you're genuinely undecided, say so with your leaning — a representative bluffing certainty in your name is worse than one honestly deferring.
  6. Script the debrief. Three asks: what was decided · what was said about [the thing you care about] · what surprised you. Anything more won't be remembered.

Output Format

# Clone brief: [meeting] — [date] · carried by [name]
## Context (3 lines)
## Position ladder
| Issue | Ideal | Acceptable | Bring back | Red line (+ the sentence) | Why |
## Tradables
[Give happily ↔ want in return]
## Your authority
[May commit up to … · beyond that, the take-it-back sentence]
## They'll probably ask
| Question | Your answer (or honest leaning) |
## Report back
[The three asks]

— 60-second corridor version —
[Spoken: the one decision, your one must, your one flexible, the boundary]

Quality Checks

  • Every ladder rung carries reasoning — the brief works when the unanticipated happens, or it doesn't work
  • The red-line sentence is scripted verbatim, sayable by someone who isn't you
  • The delegation boundary is a number or a named scope, not "use judgment"
  • At least one they'll-ask answer is an honest "undecided, leaning X" — a brief with total certainty on everything is posturing
  • The whole brief fits one page; the corridor version speaks in 60 seconds

Anti-Patterns

  • Do not send conclusions without reasoning — that's instructions for a puppet, and puppets fail on question two
  • Do not hide the real red line to seem flexible; the carrier discovers it by crossing it, in public, as you
  • Do not skip the authority boundary — its absence is how "represent me" becomes "apparently I agreed to a June deadline"
  • Do not write it agent-readable but human-hostile: the colleague is the primary reader; structure serves both

Related

[[delegation-brief]] hands off ongoing WORK; this hands off a POSITION for a single room. [[stakeholder-influence-mapper]] for reading the room you're sending it into; [[the-understudy]] for the deeper version of "represent me."

Example Trigger Phrases

  • "I can't make the meeting: brief someone to decide for me."
  • "Brief someone to negotiate for me."
  • "What would you need from me to represent me?"
  • "Write my red lines and fallbacks for the meeting."

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

Design a 360-degree feedback survey or write a structured 360 feedback report. Use when asked to build a 360 feedback process, write 360 feedback for a colleague, design a feedback survey, or produce a feedback report. Produces either a complete survey instrument with rating scales and open-ended questions, or a structured narrative feedback report with themes, strengths, and development areas.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Decode a 401k or workplace retirement plan — the real cost of its funds, the match's fine print, vesting math, and the plan features worth using or avoiding. Use when someone asks 'is my 401k any good', 'decode my 401k plan', 'which funds should I look at', or 'what fees am I paying'. Produces a fee decode in dollars-over-time, match and vesting math, a fund-lineup triage by cost, and the questions for HR or the plan administrator.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Design statistically rigorous A/B tests for product features, UI changes, onboarding flows, and pricing experiments. Use when asked to set up an experiment, design an A/B test, calculate sample size, or interpret test results. Produces a complete test plan with hypothesis, variant definitions, sample size, duration estimate, guardrail metrics, and a results interpretation guide.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Analyse a finished A/B test and write the readout — the result, whether it's statistically and practically significant, what it means, and the ship/no-ship call. Use when asked to analyse experiment results, write an A/B test readout, interpret test data, or decide whether to ship a variant. Produces a clear verdict with the lift and confidence, segment cuts, the risks (peeking, novelty, sample), and a recommendation. Distinct from planning a test — this reads results.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Build or tailor an academic CV for faculty, postdoc, research or fellowship applications: publications, grants, teaching, supervision and service in the order the field expects, with consistent citations. Use when asked to write my academic CV, update my CV for a lectureship, tenure-track or postdoc application, format my publications list, or adapt my academic CV for an industry research role. Produces the full academic CV, a field-appropriate section order, a clean publications list in one citation style, and a two-page summary version when asked.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

Generate a WCAG 2.2 accessibility audit checklist and remediation suggestions for any UI or design. Use when asked to audit for accessibility, check WCAG compliance, review a design for a11y issues, or create an accessibility remediation plan. Produces a prioritised checklist with pass/fail assessments and specific fixes.

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。

mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills1,4412026年10月13日 更新

mohitagw15856 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する