Compress a long technical document, design doc, or proposal into a one-page executive summary aimed at non-technical or time-poor stakeholders. Use when the user has a long doc and needs a 30-second readable version, or is writing a 1-pager for a steering committee, partner, or executive sponsor.
Pack stakeholder-commsTier standardJob Explain it to decision makersv0.1.0
In Claude Code, with the stakeholder-comms plugin installed, invoke it as:
/stakeholder-comms:exec-summary
Try it
A realistic prompt from the skill's acceptance evals:
Compress this 14-page platform-migration design doc into a one-page summary for our non-technical COO.
What a good result looks like
Quantify or qualify. Numbers are best ("\$2.4M ARR at risk"), but if you don't have numbers, say "directional" rather than inventing precision.
Plain language. A non-engineer should not encounter a term they don't recognize in the first paragraph.
No internal-team-speak. "OKRs", "swimlanes", "north-star metric" are okay; "sharding strategy", "eventually consistent", "blue-green" need translation or replacement.
Active voice, second person where natural. "You'll need to approve the budget" beats "budget approval will be required".
How it's checked
Measured against plain Claude Code (2026-10-23): it met 47% of its checks, against 57% without it, and a blind judge preferred it. How skills are checked
18 assertions across 3 acceptance evals, and 8 trigger queries. Every skill's checks
What the output must do
Fits one page and leads with the decision or ask, not background
Numbers are quantified where available; where they aren't, the summary says 'directional' rather than inventing precision
A non-engineer meets no unexplained technical term in the first paragraph
No internal team-speak (OKRs, swimlanes, north-star metric) survives into the summary
Nothing is asserted that isn't supported by the source document
The output is prose a reader can scan in ~30 seconds — not slides and not a deck outline
It is no more than one page (roughly 450 words or fewer)
It flags that the £310,000 headline does not match the savings breakdown, which adds up to £260,000, and does not present £310,000 as fact without qualification
It does not say Option B pays for itself in year one: savings start only when Brigg Street closes in October 2027, so the first year's savings (about £130,000) are below the £180,000 one-off cost; it tells the user why it did not lead with the requested line
It includes the public consultation result that 58% of 1,140 respondents opposed closing Brigg Street
It does not say staff support the plan; it says formal staff consultation has not started
It states the recommendation (Option B) and the decision Cabinet is asked to make, with the alternatives in brief
It does not invent figures, dates, savings for Option C, sale income for the Brigg Street building or anything else that is not in the paper
It gives exactly three bullets, with no extra sections
The bullets cover what tenants have to do and when: move cars out by 7am on Monday 2 November (car park closed until Friday 6 November), water off 9am to 1pm on Wednesday 4 November, and contact the office before 30 October to keep a front satellite dish
It gives the length of the works as about 10 to 12 weeks from around 2 November, weather permitting, without inventing a fixed end date
It does not invent compensation, rent reductions, contact details or other details that are not in the letter
It is written in plain, casual words suited to a group chat, and delivers without asking questions first
When it should and shouldn't activate
Should activate:
Summarize this design doc for our executives
I need a one-page summary of this long proposal for a non-technical stakeholder
Give me the 30-second version of this technical document
Compress this into something our COO will actually read
Should leave to another skill:
Build me a PowerPoint of this
Outline the slides for this presentation
What should I change about how I present to a board audience?