本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

salesforce-learning-brief

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.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(7)

  • SKILL.md10.3 KB
  • references/examples.md2.2 KB
  • references/gotchas.md1.4 KB
  • references/llm-anti-patterns.md5.1 KB
  • references/well-architected.md924 B
  • scripts/check_salesforce_learning_brief.py3.1 KB
  • templates/salesforce-learning-brief-template.md1.7 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。

Salesforce Learning Brief

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

SectionPurposeMaximum useful scope
OutcomeState what the learner can explain or do afterwardOne measurable outcome
PrerequisitesSurface concepts or access needed firstThree to five items
Mental modelGive the organizing idea that makes details coherentOne diagram/table or short explanation
Core conceptsTeach only the concepts needed for the outcomeThree to seven concepts
WorkflowShow the order of decisions or actionsFive to nine steps
Worked exampleConnect the concepts in one realistic scenarioOne end-to-end example
Boundaries and caveatsPreserve release, license, security, limit, and org contextOnly load-bearing caveats
Knowledge checkTest understanding, not recall of wordingThree to five questions
Practice taskLet the learner apply the concept safelyOne bounded exercise
SourcesMap claims to evidenceStable 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.

LearnerEmphasizeAvoid
AdministratorBusiness outcome, Setup model, permissions, automation interactions, safe validationAssuming source-control or Apex fluency
DeveloperRuntime behavior, metadata/code boundary, limits, testing, debugging, deploymentTreating every problem as code-first
ArchitectAlternatives, NFRs, product boundaries, lifecycle, evidence, governanceA click-by-click tutorial with no tradeoffs
AnalystData meaning, joins, filters, security, freshness, interpretation limitsPresenting returned rows as complete business truth
Release/operationsDependency order, gates, rollback, monitoring, audit evidenceEquating deploy success with outcome success
ConsultantTarget identity, edition/package differences, handoff, client assumptionsReusing one client's org facts in another context

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 stateHow the brief may present it
verified-factState directly with a citation and applicability qualifier where material
official-recommendationAttribute as recommended guidance, not a platform guarantee
inferenceLabel the reasoning and cite the facts it derives from
assumptionPresent only inside the stated scenario; never generalize it
unknownTeach the uncertainty and how to verify it
unsupportedOmit 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:

  1. Definition — what the capability is, in official/current terminology.
  2. Purpose — which problem it solves and which problem it does not solve.
  3. Mental model — the few relationships the learner must keep straight.
  4. Decision points — what changes the correct approach.
  5. Procedure or pattern — the safe sequence to use.
  6. Example — one scenario with explicit assumptions.
  7. Failure modes — the two or three mistakes most likely to mislead this learner.
  8. 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

  1. Validate the packet and learner context with architect/salesforce-learning-research; preserve claim IDs and confirm role, level, outcome, time budget, and source boundary.
  2. Select and sequence concepts from mental model to decision points to application, deferring neighboring topics that do not support the outcome.
  3. Draft with claim discipline by mapping every material statement to evidence and retaining release, product, edition/license, API, org, and lifecycle qualifiers.
  4. Demonstrate transfer with one worked example, explicit assumptions, failure modes, and a safe verification path.
  5. Assess and practice with changed-constraint knowledge checks, answers, and one bounded practice task with acceptance checks and a stop condition.
  6. 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:

python3 skills/admin/salesforce-learning-brief/scripts/check_salesforce_learning_brief.py --input path/to/learning-brief.md

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.

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 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.

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。

PranavNagrecha/AwesomeSalesforceSkills192026年10月4日 更新

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.

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。

PranavNagrecha/AwesomeSalesforceSkills192026年10月4日 更新

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.

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。

PranavNagrecha/AwesomeSalesforceSkills192026年10月4日 更新

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).

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。

PranavNagrecha/AwesomeSalesforceSkills192026年10月4日 更新

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.

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。

PranavNagrecha/AwesomeSalesforceSkills192026年10月4日 更新

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.

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。

PranavNagrecha/AwesomeSalesforceSkills192026年10月4日 更新

PranavNagrecha のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する