Turn a verified Salesforce research packet into a concise, role-aware learning brief with clear objectives, concept sequencing, worked examples, release caveats, checks for understanding, and citations mapped to claims. Trigger keywords: teach me Salesforce, explain Salesforce concept, create learning brief, Salesforce study guide, role-based lesson. NOT for open-ended source discovery or freshness verification — use architect/salesforce-learning-research first. NOT for generating production metadata or changing an org.
Use this skill after evidence has been gathered and classified. The brief teaches a bounded Salesforce outcome without flattening product guarantees, recommendations, org assumptions, preview features, and practitioner judgment into one authoritative voice.
Input Gate
A valid input must provide:
learner role, current level, and concrete learning outcome;
an evidence or research packet with claim-to-source mapping;
release/API/product context for changing behavior;
visible gaps, contradictions, and claims that must not be taught as fact.
When evidence is missing, do not fill the lesson from memory. Route to architect/salesforce-learning-research, remain explicitly source-bounded, or return a partial brief whose unsupported sections are marked.
Brief Shape
Section
Purpose
Maximum useful scope
Outcome
State what the learner can explain or do afterward
One measurable outcome
Prerequisites
Surface concepts or access needed first
Three to five items
Mental model
Give the organizing idea that makes details coherent
One diagram/table or short explanation
Core concepts
Teach only the concepts needed for the outcome
Three to seven concepts
Workflow
Show the order of decisions or actions
Five to nine steps
Worked example
Connect the concepts in one realistic scenario
One end-to-end example
Boundaries and caveats
Preserve release, license, security, limit, and org context
Only load-bearing caveats
Knowledge check
Test understanding, not recall of wording
Three to five questions
Practice task
Let the learner apply the concept safely
One bounded exercise
Sources
Map claims to evidence
Stable citations, not a link dump
Do not reproduce the entire research packet. The packet is evidence; the brief is instruction.
Role-Aware Teaching
Adjust examples and vocabulary without changing the facts.
Learner
Emphasize
Avoid
Administrator
Business outcome, Setup model, permissions, automation interactions, safe validation
State the assumed level—foundation, practitioner, or advanced—and define unfamiliar terms at first use. Do not oversimplify away load-bearing Salesforce constraints.
Claim-to-Teaching Rules
Research state
How the brief may present it
verified-fact
State directly with a citation and applicability qualifier where material
official-recommendation
Attribute as recommended guidance, not a platform guarantee
inference
Label the reasoning and cite the facts it derives from
assumption
Present only inside the stated scenario; never generalize it
unknown
Teach the uncertainty and how to verify it
unsupported
Omit from the lesson or place in Do not teach as fact
Every numeric limit, lifecycle date, feature status, command option, and release-sensitive behavior requires a nearby citation. Stable conceptual explanations can share citations at the paragraph or section level when the mapping remains unambiguous.
Explain in Layers
Use a consistent learning progression:
Definition — what the capability is, in official/current terminology.
Purpose — which problem it solves and which problem it does not solve.
Mental model — the few relationships the learner must keep straight.
Decision points — what changes the correct approach.
Procedure or pattern — the safe sequence to use.
Example — one scenario with explicit assumptions.
Failure modes — the two or three mistakes most likely to mislead this learner.
Verification — how to prove the learner's interpretation or configuration.
For advanced learners, compress definitions and deepen tradeoffs, evidence, and exceptions. For beginners, reduce branching but retain safety and context.
Examples Without Fabrication
A worked example must state:
scenario and learner role;
target product/release assumptions;
object, metadata, or code names that are illustrative rather than claimed to exist;
expected behavior;
verification step;
limits of what the example proves.
Use sample API names such as Priority_Reason__c only when clearly labeled illustrative. Never imply that a field, permission set, package, license, or org feature exists unless the evidence packet proves it.
For procedural lessons, show a dry-run, preview, scratch-org, or read-only verification path before any write. A learning brief does not authorize production mutation.
Knowledge Checks
Prefer questions that expose misconceptions:
distinguish two neighboring concepts;
choose an approach under a changed constraint;
identify which statement is a guarantee versus a recommendation;
identify missing org/release evidence;
predict a failure mode and verification step.
Provide answers separately so the learner can self-test. Do not write trivia about UI label location unless the UI path is the learning outcome.
Recommended Workflow
Validate the packet and learner context with architect/salesforce-learning-research; preserve claim IDs and confirm role, level, outcome, time budget, and source boundary.
Select and sequence concepts from mental model to decision points to application, deferring neighboring topics that do not support the outcome.
Draft with claim discipline by mapping every material statement to evidence and retaining release, product, edition/license, API, org, and lifecycle qualifiers.
Demonstrate transfer with one worked example, explicit assumptions, failure modes, and a safe verification path.
Assess and practice with changed-constraint knowledge checks, answers, and one bounded practice task with acceptance checks and a stop condition.
Expose uncertainty and validate by listing unsupported/context-dependent claims under Do not teach as fact, running the bundled checker, and reviewing that every citation supports the claim attached to it.
Completion Checklist
One measurable learner outcome is stated
Role, level, time budget, and product/release context are explicit
Prerequisites and official terminology are clear
Facts, recommendations, inferences, assumptions, and unknowns remain distinguishable
Release-sensitive and numeric claims have nearby citations
One example declares assumptions and verification
Security, permissions, limits, and target identity remain visible where relevant
Knowledge checks test application and misconceptions
A bounded practice task is included
Unsupported claims are omitted or listed under Do not teach as fact
The brief does not authorize or perform production changes
Output and Validation
Draft with templates/salesforce-learning-brief-template.md, then run:
The checker validates structure and citation signals; a human or independent reviewer must still confirm that each citation supports the associated claim.
Related Skills
architect/salesforce-learning-research — required evidence acquisition, freshness, and contradiction handling.
Domain skill for the topic — supplies practitioner workflow and Salesforce-specific gotchas after source verification.
architect/salesforce-decision-analysis — use when the learner's real need is to choose among viable approaches rather than understand one topic.
Agent output-format skills — convert a completed brief to other artifacts without changing its claims.
See the bundled references for beginner/advanced variants, teaching gotchas, and LLM failure modes.
Use this skill when writing test-first, behavior-driven acceptance criteria in Given/When/Then format for a Salesforce user story. Covers happy path, edge cases, negative paths, permission boundaries, and data-state preconditions so the AC block can drive UAT scripts and Apex test design downstream. Trigger keywords: given when then, gherkin, behavior driven AC, test first acceptance criteria, scenario outline, BDD acceptance criteria. NOT for the user-story format itself (use admin/user-story-writing-for-salesforce). NOT for UAT script writing (use admin/uat-test-case-design). NOT for Apex test method generation (use agents/test-class-generator). NOT for high-level UAT planning (use admin/uat-and-acceptance-criteria). More triggers: acceptance criteria record, ac_id, req_id on a criterion, artefact under test, negative case for a rule-type requirement, no-match fall-through criterion, oracle for a Then clause, test type apex flow manual, criteria linter, check_ac_format.py, --manifest-dir.
Task and Event objects: polymorphic WhatId/WhoId, Activity object model, ActivityHistory vs OpenActivity, activity timeline customization, bulk task creation, Einstein Activity Capture boundaries. NOT for turning on EAC or calendar sync — use admin/einstein-activity-capture-setup. NOT for Email-to-Case — use admin/case-management-setup. Covers ActivitiesSettings metadata, enableActivities, shared Task/Event custom fields and FLS, TaskStatus value sets, Shared Activities and TaskRelation/EventRelation, recurring and child activities, and partial-success bulk DML on Task.
Design Invocable Apex actions that return deterministic, agent-friendly errors instead of surfacing raw exceptions to the LLM. NOT for authoring the action itself — @InvocableMethod schema, labels, security context — use agentforce/custom-agent-actions-apex. NOT for the Apex tests that force each error branch — use agentforce/agent-action-unit-tests.
Use when designing how an Agentforce agent extracts structured input parameters (slots) from a user's natural-language utterance to invoke an action. Triggers: 'agent extract date from user', 'agent action argument extraction', 'agentforce slot filling', 'agent invocable input mapping', 'agent fails to fill required parameter'. NOT for action authoring (use agentforce/agent-actions) or for prompt-template variable binding (use agentforce/prompt-builder-templates).
Apex test patterns for @InvocableMethod agent actions: per-reason-code branch coverage, bulk safety, callout mocking, deterministic assertions. NOT for testing whether the agent routes to the right topic or answers well — use agentforce/agent-testing-and-evaluation. NOT for designing the error envelope the tests assert on — use agentforce/agent-action-error-handling.
Designing or reviewing Agentforce actions: Flow actions, Apex invocable actions, prompt-template actions, action naming, input and output contracts, confirmation requirements, and safe error behavior. Triggers: 'agent actions', 'build an agent that can look up an order', 'make the agent able to check order status', 'give the agent a capability', 'agent that can retrieve a record', 'flow action for agent', 'agent invocable action', 'action schema design'. NOT for writing the Apex class itself — use agentforce/custom-agent-actions-apex. NOT for the reason_code error envelope that stops an agent retry loop — use agentforce/agent-action-error-handling.