Track and update action item status from natural language updates like 'Seanのメールには返信しておいた' or 'Lu対応予定'. Integrates with daily-comms-ops workflow. Use when managing action items across communication channels.
wbs-review-assistant
Review WBS (Work Breakdown Structure) Excel files against requirements docs, hearing sheets, and prior decisions to identify gaps, inconsistencies, and deviations. Add review comments to Excel cells and generate summary reports.
含まれるファイル(11)
- SKILL.md6.7 KB
- references/common_wbs_issues.md11.1 KB
- references/review_checklist.yaml4.9 KB
- references/wbs_review_methodology.md7.9 KB
- scripts/excel_annotator.py8.7 KB
- scripts/requirements_parser.py10.2 KB
- scripts/tests/conftest.py818 B
- scripts/tests/test_excel_annotator.py7.3 KB
- scripts/tests/test_requirements_parser.py5.6 KB
- scripts/tests/test_wbs_reviewer.py11.1 KB
- scripts/wbs_reviewer.py19.7 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。
WBS Review Assistant
Overview
Review and annotate Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Excel files against project requirements, hearing sheets, and prior decisions. Automatically identify gaps, inconsistencies, deviations from agreed principles, and missing tasks. Add review comments directly to Excel cells and generate prioritized summary reports with actionable findings.
When to Use
- User requests "review this WBS against requirements"
- User provides WBS Excel file + requirement documents for gap analysis
- User asks to "check WBS consistency with hearing sheet decisions"
- User needs to validate WBS completeness before baseline approval
- User wants to annotate WBS with review comments in Excel
- Project manager needs prioritized list of WBS issues before kickoff
Prerequisites
- Python 3.9+
- No API keys required
- Dependencies:
openpyxl,pandas,pyyaml
Workflow
Step 1: Gather Review Inputs
Collect the following files:
- WBS Excel file (
.xlsx) - the WBS to be reviewed - Requirements document (
.pdf,.docx,.md) - project requirements or specifications - Hearing sheet / meeting notes (optional) - decisions and clarifications from stakeholder meetings
- Review checklist (optional) - custom review criteria YAML file
# User provides files in conversation or specifies paths
# Claude will read these files to understand context
Step 2: Run WBS Review Analysis
Execute the review script to analyze the WBS against requirements:
python3 scripts/wbs_reviewer.py \
--wbs path/to/wbs.xlsx \
--requirements path/to/requirements.md \
--hearing-sheet path/to/hearing_notes.md \
--output-dir ./wbs_review_output \
--checklist references/review_checklist.yaml
Parameters:
--wbs- Path to WBS Excel file--requirements- Path to requirements document--hearing-sheet- (Optional) Path to hearing notes--output-dir- Directory for output files--checklist- (Optional) Custom review criteria YAML
Step 3: Review Generated Outputs
The script generates:
-
Annotated WBS Excel (
wbs_annotated_YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS.xlsx)- Original WBS with review comments added to cells
- Color-coded severity (Red=Critical, Orange=Major, Yellow=Minor)
- Comment threads with finding ID references
-
Summary Report (
wbs_review_summary_YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS.md)- Executive summary with issue count by severity
- Prioritized findings list with recommendations
- Coverage analysis (requirements mapped to WBS tasks)
- Missing task candidates
-
Gap Analysis JSON (
wbs_gaps_YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS.json)- Machine-readable findings with structured data
- Traceability matrix (requirements → WBS tasks)
- Validation results for each checklist criterion
Step 4: Present Findings to User
Provide a concise summary:
- Total issue count by severity (Critical / Major / Minor)
- Top 5 prioritized findings
- Overall WBS readiness assessment
- Link to annotated Excel and full report
Output Format
Annotated Excel Structure
The annotated WBS Excel contains:
- Original columns preserved - No modification to WBS structure
- Cell comments added - Review findings attached to relevant cells
- Conditional formatting - Color-coded by severity
- Red fill: Critical issues
- Orange fill: Major issues
- Yellow fill: Minor issues
- New sheet: "Review Summary" - Issue dashboard with filters
Markdown Summary Report
# WBS Review Summary
**Review Date:** YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS
**WBS File:** wbs.xlsx
**Requirements:** requirements.md
## Executive Summary
- **Critical Issues:** N
- **Major Issues:** N
- **Minor Issues:** N
- **Overall Readiness:** [Ready / Needs Revision / Incomplete]
## Top Priority Findings
### [CRITICAL-001] Missing Acceptance Criteria for Phase 2
**Location:** Row 45, Task "User Acceptance Testing"
**Issue:** No acceptance criteria defined despite requirement REQ-012
**Recommendation:** Add explicit UAT pass/fail criteria based on REQ-012
...
## Requirements Coverage Analysis
| Requirement ID | Requirement Name | Mapped Tasks | Status |
|----------------|------------------|--------------|--------|
| REQ-001 | User Authentication | Task 1.2.1, 1.2.3 | ✓ Covered |
| REQ-005 | Data Migration | (none) | ✗ Missing |
## Missing Task Candidates
1. **Data migration validation** (from REQ-005)
2. **Security audit milestone** (from hearing notes 2025-12-10)
JSON Gap Analysis
{
"schema_version": "1.0",
"review_timestamp": "2026-03-19T08:00:00Z",
"wbs_file": "wbs.xlsx",
"summary": {
"total_tasks": 120,
"critical_issues": 3,
"major_issues": 8,
"minor_issues": 15,
"readiness_score": 75
},
"findings": [
{
"id": "CRITICAL-001",
"severity": "critical",
"category": "missing_acceptance_criteria",
"location": "Row 45, Column E",
"task_name": "User Acceptance Testing",
"issue": "No acceptance criteria defined",
"requirement_ref": "REQ-012",
"recommendation": "Add explicit UAT pass/fail criteria"
}
],
"traceability_matrix": [
{
"requirement_id": "REQ-001",
"requirement_name": "User Authentication",
"mapped_tasks": ["1.2.1", "1.2.3"],
"coverage_status": "covered"
}
],
"missing_tasks": [
{
"source": "REQ-005",
"suggested_task": "Data migration validation",
"priority": "high"
}
]
}
Resources
scripts/wbs_reviewer.py-- Main WBS review engine with gap analysis logicscripts/excel_annotator.py-- Excel comment injection and formatting utilitiesscripts/requirements_parser.py-- Extract requirements from various document formatsreferences/review_checklist.yaml-- Default WBS review criteria and validation rulesreferences/wbs_review_methodology.md-- Review principles and best practicesreferences/common_wbs_issues.md-- Pattern library of frequent WBS problemsassets/review_template.xlsx-- Template for "Review Summary" sheet structure
Key Principles
- Non-Destructive Review - Never modify original WBS structure; only add comments and formatting
- Requirement Traceability - Every requirement must map to at least one WBS task
- Evidence-Based Findings - All issues must reference specific requirement IDs or hearing notes
- Prioritized Actionability - Findings sorted by severity and impact on project success
- Bilingual Support - Handle Japanese and English WBS/requirements seamlessly
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
AI活用提案の専門コンサルタントスキル。LLM・AIエージェントの活用事例知識を基に、業界別、部門別、シーン別に最適なAI導入提案を行います。システム化、業務改善、効率化を得意とし、具体的な活用事例、期待効果、導入ステップを含む実践的な提案を提供します。Use when proposing AI/LLM adoption strategies for specific industries, departments, or business scenarios.
Generate AI-powered BPO service proposals for Japanese companies in the US market. Use when creating outsourcing proposals with AI service menus, ROI estimation, implementation roadmaps, and bilingual (JA/EN) proposal documents for 在米日系企業向けAI実装.
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。
AI(LLM)が生成した日本語テキストの「AI臭」を検出・診断し、人間らしい文章にリライトするスキル。 Use when: 「AIっぽい文章を直して」「人間らしくリライトして」「AI臭を消して」「この文章をもっと自然にして」 「テキストのAI感を減らして」「機械っぽさを取りたい」 "make this sound more human", "remove AI tone", "humanize this text", "detect if this is AI-generated". 6つのAI特有パターン(視覚的マーカー、単調なリズム、マニュアル的構成、非コミット姿勢、抽象語の濫用、 定型メタファー)を正規表現ベースで検出し、0-100のAI臭スコアを算出。3つの人間化技法 (バランスを崩す・客観を崩す・論理を崩す)でリライトを実行する。 Note: 検出スクリプトは日本語テキスト専用。英語テキストの場合はClaude自身がreferences/を参照して分析・リライトする。
Generate audit-ready internal control design documents from As-Is business process inventories. Produces control IDs, assertion mappings, procedures, SoD analysis, KPIs, materiality thresholds, and implementation roadmaps. Use when building internal controls for new audit engagements, SOX/J-SOX compliance, or process improvement initiatives.
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。
Review audit-related documents (control design documents, bottleneck analyses, requirements definitions, etc.) for quality, scoring them 0-100 with a severity-rated findings list. Use when reviewing audit documents, checking control design quality, or verifying cross-document consistency. Supports documents governed by US GAAP, IFRS, or J-GAAP.
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。