Utility Pm Skill Builder

<!-- PM-Skills | https://github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills | Apache 2.0 -->

PM Skill Builder

This skill creates new PM skills for the pm-skills library. It produces a Skill Implementation Packet - a complete design document with draft files in a staging area for review before promotion to canonical locations.

When to Use

• When you have an idea for a new PM skill
• When you want to add a domain skill (phase-specific), foundation skill

(cross-cutting), or utility skill (meta/tooling) to the pm-skills library

• When a contributor needs guided skill creation that follows repo conventions

When NOT to Use

• To modify or improve an existing skill → use utility-pm-skill-iterate
• To audit an existing skill against conventions → use utility-pm-skill-validate
• To create a skill for a non-pm-skills context → use a general agent skill builder
• To create a workflow → workflows are authored directly, not via this builder

Instructions

When asked to create a new PM skill, follow these steps:

Step 1: Understand the Idea

Accept the idea in either form:

• Problem-first: "What PM problem does this skill solve? Who runs into

this problem, and what do they currently produce (or fail to produce)?"

• Skill-first: "Describe the skill you want to create. What artifact

does it produce? What PM activity does it support?"

Both entry points produce the same downstream flow. If the user provides one form, do not ask for the other - extract what you need and proceed.

If the idea is vague, ask ONE follow-up question to clarify the artifact type and target audience before proceeding.

Step 2: Gap Analysis

Check ALL existing skills for overlap. Use the Current Library Reference table below AND scan the skills/ directory for the latest inventory.

Present findings with specificity:

• Name each overlapping skill and explain what it covers
• Identify the specific gap this new skill would fill
• If overlap is high, trigger the Why Gate (see below)

Why Gate (triggers when overlap is found): Ask the user: "Name 2-3 specific prompts or scenarios where the existing skills fail to produce what you need."

Kill Gate: If the user cannot articulate convincing gaps, recommend an alternative:

• "Revise [existing skill] to cover this case"
• "Create a workflow combining [skill A] + [skill B]"
• "Add a command variant, not a new skill"
• "This is a documentation improvement, not a new skill"

Do not proceed past the kill gate without either convincing evidence of a gap or explicit user override.

Step 3: Scope Check

Evaluate whether the idea should be ONE skill or MULTIPLE skills.

Splitting signals:

• The idea produces multiple distinct artifact types
• The idea crosses Triple Diamond phases (e.g., Discover + Deliver)
• The description naturally contains "and" connecting two activities

If splitting is warranted, present the recommendation: "This seems to cover two distinct PM activities: 1. [Activity A] → produces [Artifact A] 2. [Activity B] → produces [Artifact B] These work better as separate skills that can be chained via a workflow. Want to proceed with just [Activity A] for now?"

Step 4: Classification + Repo-Fit

Determine the skill's classification and naming:

Domain skills (phase-specific PM activities):

• Phase: discover | define | develop | deliver | measure | iterate
• Directory: {phase}-{skill-name}
• Frontmatter: phase: {phase} (required), no classification field

Foundation skills (cross-cutting, used across phases):

• No phase
• Directory: foundation-{skill-name}
• Frontmatter: classification: foundation (required), no phase field
• Use when: the skill applies to multiple phases equally

Utility skills (meta-skills, repo tooling):

• No phase
• Directory: utility-{skill-name}
• Frontmatter: classification: utility (required), no phase field
• Use when: the skill operates on the repo, workflow, or other skills

Exemplar selection: Identify 1-2 existing skills that are the closest structural match:

• Same phase > same category > similar artifact type
• Read their SKILL.md to understand section structure, instruction style,

output contract format, and quality checklist pattern

• Name the exemplars explicitly: "Modeled after [skill] - same phase,

[category] category"

Present the classification and exemplar selection for user confirmation.

Step 4.5: Eval Readiness (the eval contract)

A new skill must ship eval-ready so coverage never falls behind: routing health and output quality are both measurable from day one. Decide the eval contract here, then emit its assets in Step 5. Four parts:

A. Nearest neighbors (C-2). Name the new skill's 1-3 nearest neighbors - the existing skills whose triggers most overlap. Derive them from the Step 2 gap analysis plus same-phase / same-category siblings. These neighbors drive the boundary pointers (below), the near-miss trigger fixtures (Step 5), and the collision probe (Step 7).

B. Reciprocal boundary pointers (C-3). The draft SKILL.md MUST include a ## When NOT to Use section that names each neighbor and says when to use that neighbor instead. For every neighbor, also add the reciprocal pointer back: a "When NOT to Use" bullet in the neighbor's SKILL.md pointing to the new skill. If the overlap is strong enough to be a measured collision pair, add the pair to COLLISION_PAIRS in scripts/check-trigger-fixtures.mjs so the reciprocity gate (check-reciprocal-boundary-pointers.mjs) and the collision probe both cover it. Reciprocal pointers are what kept the v2.26.0 rewrites collision-clean.

C. Output-eval family (C-4). Map the skill to an output-eval family rubric so its artifact quality is measurable. Pick by phase/category:

Family rubrics live at docs/internal/eval-rubrics/{family}.md. If the skill fits a family that has a rubric, use that family value in the scenario frontmatter. If it opens a NEW family (meeting/tool skills have none yet), note "no family rubric yet - author one before the skill enters the output-eval roster" and skip the family value.

D. Fixture + scenario plan (C-1, C-4). Plan the two eval-asset files emitted in Step 5: a trigger-fixtures.json (routing) and an output-scenarios/<id>.md (output quality). Their shapes are specified in Step 5 items 13-14.

Present the neighbors + family + reciprocal-pointer plan for user confirmation before generating the packet.

Step 5: Generate Skill Implementation Packet

Produce the complete packet using references/TEMPLATE.md as the format. The packet includes:

1. Decision - recommendation + Why Gate evidence (if applicable) 2. Classification - type, phase (if domain), category, directory name 3. Overlap Analysis - what was found, why this skill is still needed 4. Exemplar Skills - which existing skills modeled, why 5. Draft Frontmatter - complete, valid YAML block. The frontmatter MUST begin with --- at byte 0 of the file (no preceding content of any kind, including HTML comments, BOM, or whitespace). Place any attribution comment AFTER the closing --- fence, never before. Reference: library/skill-output-samples/SAMPLE_CREATION.md Section 5. 6. Draft SKILL.md - full content (not an outline), mirroring exemplar structure 7. Draft TEMPLATE.md - section headers with guidance comments 8. Draft EXAMPLE.md - complete, realistic example (150-300 lines) with a specific PM scenario, every section filled, optional sections demonstrated both filled and skipped 9. Draft Command - command frontmatter 10. AGENTS.md Entry - exact text to add 11. Validation Checklist - all CI rules checked against the draft 12. Next Steps - local CI, testing, contribution workflow 13. Draft trigger-fixtures.json (C-1, routing eval) - evals/trigger-fixtures.json: a JSON object { "schema": 1, "skill": "{name}", "runs_per_query": 3, "trigger_threshold": 0.5, "queries": [...] }. The queries array needs >= 16 total, >= 8 with `"expect": "trigger"` (drawn from the skill's real intents, NOT just artifact keywords - include intent-only asks) and >= 8 with `"expect": "no-trigger"`, of which >= 2 are near-misses aimed at the Step 4.5 neighbors (mark them "near_miss_of": "{neighbor}"). Split each class ~60/40 across "split": "train" / "split": "validation". This is the B-4 fixture contract (scripts/check-trigger-fixtures.mjs). 14. Draft output-scenario (C-4, output-quality eval) - evals/output-scenarios/{id}.md: frontmatter scenario: {id} / skill: {name} / family: {family from Step 4.5} / created: {date}, then a realistic input brief (>= 100 chars of body) that gives the skill arm and a freehand control the same raw material. This is the B-7 asset contract (scripts/check-output-eval-assets.mjs). Omit family only if Step 4.5 found no rubric yet.

Step 6: Write to Staging Area

Write all generated files to the staging area:

_staging/pm-skill-builder/{skill-name}/
├── SKILL.md               ← draft skill file
├── references/
│   ├── TEMPLATE.md        ← draft template
│   └── EXAMPLE.md         ← draft example
├── evals/
│   ├── trigger-fixtures.json        ← draft routing fixtures (C-1)
│   └── output-scenarios/{id}.md     ← draft output-quality scenario (C-4)
└── command.md             ← draft command

Note: _staging/ is gitignored - draft artifacts never ship in releases.

The staging folder is discarded after promotion.

Report what was written and where.

Step 7: Promote (on confirmation)

Ask: "Review the packet above. When ready, I'll promote the files to their canonical locations. Proceed? [yes/no]"

If yes, promote by copying each file from staging to its canonical path:

Where {dir-name} is the classification-prefixed directory (e.g., deliver-change-communication).

Then: 1. Create the target directories: skills/{dir-name}/references/ and skills/{dir-name}/evals/output-scenarios/ 2. Copy each file to its canonical location 3. Append the AGENTS.md entry from the packet; if Step 4.5 declared a collision pair, add it to COLLISION_PAIRS in scripts/check-trigger-fixtures.mjs and add the reciprocal "When NOT to Use" bullet to each neighbor's SKILL.md 4. Run CI validation: bash scripts/lint-skills-frontmatter.sh && bash scripts/validate-agents-md.sh && bash scripts/validate-commands.sh, then the eval-asset gates node scripts/check-trigger-fixtures.mjs, node scripts/check-output-eval-assets.mjs, node scripts/check-reciprocal-boundary-pointers.mjs, and the collision probe node scripts/check-new-skill-collision.mjs --skill={name} (C-2 - confirms the new skill recalls its own triggers and steals none of a neighbor's). Regenerate the catalog surfaces: node scripts/gen-skill-manifest.mjs && node scripts/gen-skill-manifest.mjs --agents 5. If validation passes, delete the staging folder: _staging/pm-skill-builder/{skill-name}/ 6. If validation fails, report the error and keep staging intact for fixes

Design rationale lives in the GitHub issue, PR, or effort brief - not in a permanent packet file.

Provide post-promotion guidance:

• "Run CI locally: bash scripts/lint-skills-frontmatter.sh"
• "Test the skill: try /{command-name} with a realistic scenario"
• "If contributing: create a GitHub issue with the skill-proposal template,

then open a PR"

Current Library Reference

Use this table for gap analysis - it reflects the current skill inventory. Also scan the skills/ directory for the latest authoritative count.

Domain Skills (30)

Foundation Skills (11)

Utility Skills (12)

Output Contract

The builder MUST produce draft files for the new skill:

• SKILL.md - full skill instructions (including a When NOT to Use section naming neighbors, C-3)
• references/TEMPLATE.md - output template with guidance comments
• references/EXAMPLE.md - complete worked example (150-300 lines)
• evals/trigger-fixtures.json - routing eval fixtures (C-1; B-4 contract)
• evals/output-scenarios/{id}.md - output-quality scenario + family rubric (C-4; B-7 contract)
• command.md - slash command file

All drafts are written to _staging/pm-skill-builder/{skill-name}/ (gitignored).

On promotion, files are copied to canonical locations, AGENTS.md is updated, and the staging folder is discarded.

Quality Checklist

Before finalizing the packet, verify all items in both tiers:

CI Validation (must pass)

• [ ] name matches directory name
• [ ] Description is 20-100 words (single-line, no multiline YAML)
• [ ] version, updated, license all present
• [ ] Classification correct (domain → phase:, foundation/utility → classification:)
• [ ] Directory name follows convention: {phase/classification}-{skill-name}
• [ ] TEMPLATE.md has ≥3 ## sections
• [ ] Command file references correct skill path
• [ ] AGENTS.md entry uses #### + **Path:** format

Quality Checks (should pass)

• [ ] Gap analysis checked all existing skills (not just same-phase)
• [ ] Why Gate evidence is specific (names prompts/scenarios, not vague)
• [ ] EXAMPLE.md is a complete artifact (150-300 lines), not an outline
• [ ] Output contract is present in draft SKILL.md
• [ ] Quality checklist is present in draft SKILL.md

Eval contract (C-1..C-4; ship eval-ready)

• [ ] Nearest neighbors named (C-2); When NOT to Use section points to each
• [ ] Reciprocal "When NOT to Use" pointer added back from each neighbor (C-3); collision pair added to COLLISION_PAIRS if strong overlap
• [ ] evals/trigger-fixtures.json present and meets the B-4 contract (>=16 queries, >=8/class, >=2 near-misses, train/validation split)
• [ ] evals/output-scenarios/{id}.md present with scenario/skill/family frontmatter mapping to an existing rubric (or family deferred with a noted reason)
• [ ] Collision probe run, key-free: check-new-skill-collision.mjs --skill={name} --emit-tasks, then dispatch the pm-skill-router sub-agent (Haiku) over the emitted queries and apply the verdict; the new skill recalls its triggers and steals none of a neighbor's. (Unattended CI may instead use the Messages-API path with ANTHROPIC_API_KEY.)

Examples

See references/EXAMPLE.md for a completed Skill Implementation Packet demonstrating a realistic domain skill creation.

utility-pm-skill-builder - Version History

1.1.1 (2026-06-20)

Doc-currency patch for the v2.28.0 release (new foundation skill foundation-stakeholder-briefings): added its row to the "Current Library Reference" foundation table and bumped the count 9 to 10, so the builder's gap analysis sees the full inventory. No change to the create-a-skill flow.

1.1.0 (2026-06-15)

Eval-contract integration (v2.27.0 eval program, plan items C-1 through C-4): the builder now produces eval-ready skills so routing and output-quality coverage never falls behind the catalog.

• Step 4.5 Eval Readiness (new): name nearest neighbors (C-2), require reciprocal "When NOT to Use" boundary pointers and a COLLISION_PAIRS entry for strong overlaps (C-3), and assign an output-eval family rubric via a phase/category mapping table (C-4).
• Packet + staging + promotion: added evals/trigger-fixtures.json (the B-4 routing-fixture contract: >=16 queries, >=8/class, >=2 neighbor near-misses, train/validation split) and evals/output-scenarios/{id}.md (the B-7 output-scenario contract: scenario/skill/family frontmatter + a >=100-char brief). Promotion now runs the eval-asset gates + the check-new-skill-collision.mjs probe (C-2) and regenerates the catalog surfaces.
• Output Contract + Quality Checklist: the eval assets are now required outputs with a dedicated checklist tier.
• Refreshed the stale "When NOT to Use" section (the planned validate/iterate utilities now exist as utility-pm-skill-validate / utility-pm-skill-iterate).
• Refreshed the "Current Library Reference" table to the live catalog (domain 30 / foundation 9 / utility 12; added the 11 missing rows) per the 2026-06-15 doc-currency audit, so gap analysis sees the full inventory.

No change to the core create-a-skill flow (Steps 1-4, 5-7); the eval contract is additive.

1.0.0 (2026-03-22)

Baseline row for the prior published version; see git history for its changes.

Skill Implementation Packet: Change Communication

Created: 2026-03-22

Builder version: 1.0.0

Status: Draft

---

Decision

Recommendation: Create new skill.

A mid-stage SaaS company needs a repeatable way to produce change management communications when shipping features that alter user workflows. Existing skills cover adjacent concerns (release notes for external announcements, launch checklists for cross-functional readiness) but nothing guides the actual writing of internal adoption-focused communications that help users understand what changed, why it matters, and what they need to do differently.

---

Classification

---

Overlap Analysis

Existing skills checked

All current skills reviewed (full catalog scan). Closest matches:

• deliver-release-notes - produces external-facing release announcements
• deliver-launch-checklist - tracks cross-functional launch readiness
• deliver-user-stories - defines implementation requirements
• discover-stakeholder-summary - maps stakeholder needs and influence

Findings

deliver-release-notes: Covers what shipped and why users should care, but targets external audiences (changelog readers, update-notification subscribers). Change communications target internal users, support teams, and account managers who need to understand workflow impact and guide adoption.

deliver-launch-checklist: Includes "communications sent" as a line item but does not guide what those communications should contain, how to structure them for different audiences, or how to sequence rollout messaging.

Why this skill is still needed

No existing skill produces the actual communication artifact - the email, Slack message, or internal knowledge-base update that tells affected users what changed, what they need to do differently, and where to get help. This is a distinct coordination artifact in the Deliver phase.

---

Exemplar Skills

---

Draft Frontmatter

<!-- PM-Skills | https://github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills | Apache 2.0 -->
---
name: deliver-change-communication
description: Creates targeted change management communications for feature launches that alter user workflows. Guides audience segmentation, impact assessment, message drafting, and rollout sequencing to drive adoption and reduce support burden for SaaS product changes.
phase: deliver
version: "1.0.0"
updated: 2026-03-22
license: Apache-2.0
metadata:
  category: coordination
  frameworks: [triple-diamond]
  author: product-on-purpose
---

---

Draft SKILL.md

Representative excerpt showing all section headers with sample content.

A full implementation would expand each section to 5-15 lines.

# Change Communication

Change communication bridges the gap between shipping a feature and ensuring
affected users successfully adopt the new workflow.

## When to Use

- When a feature launch changes existing user workflows
- When multiple audience segments need different levels of detail
- When support teams need advance preparation for user questions

## Instructions

### Step 1: Identify the Change and Affected Audiences
Gather the feature context and segment audiences by impact level.

### Step 2: Assess Workflow Impact
Map before/after workflows for each audience segment.

### Step 3: Draft Per-Audience Messages
Write targeted communications using the template structure.

### Step 4: Plan Rollout Sequence
Determine timing and channels for each audience segment.

### Step 5: Review and Finalize
Verify completeness, tone, and accuracy with stakeholders.

## Output Contract

Use `references/TEMPLATE.md` to structure the output.

## Quality Checklist

- [ ] All affected audience segments are identified
- [ ] Before/after workflow changes are explicit
- [ ] Each message includes what changed, why, and what to do next
- [ ] Support enablement section is complete
- [ ] Rollout timing accounts for audience dependencies

## Examples

See `references/EXAMPLE.md` for a completed example.

---

Draft TEMPLATE.md

Representative excerpt with section headers and guidance comments.

# Change Communication: {Feature Name}

## Change Summary

> Describe the feature change in 2-3 sentences. Focus on what users will
> experience differently, not technical implementation details.

## Affected Audiences

> List each audience segment with their relationship to the change.

| Audience | Impact Level | Primary Channel |
|----------|-------------|-----------------|
| {segment} | High / Medium / Low | {email / Slack / in-app / KB article} |

## Workflow Impact Assessment

> For each audience, describe the before and after states.

### {Audience Segment}

**Before**: {current workflow}
**After**: {new workflow}
**Action required**: {what they need to do differently}

## Communications

### {Audience Segment} Message

> Draft the actual message content for this audience.

**Subject**: {email subject or message headline}
**Body**: {complete message text}

## Support Enablement

> What does the support team need to know to handle questions?

## Rollout Schedule

> When does each communication go out, relative to the launch?

| Audience | Timing | Channel | Owner |
|----------|--------|---------|-------|
| {segment} | {T-N days / launch day / T+N days} | {channel} | {person} |

---

Draft EXAMPLE.md

A complete example would demonstrate a change communication package for a realistic SaaS scenario - such as migrating a dashboard reporting interface from a legacy layout to a new design system. It would fill every template section with concrete content: three audience segments (power users, casual viewers, account administrators), before/after workflow descriptions, drafted messages per audience, a support FAQ, and a rollout timeline spanning T-5 through T+3 days. Target length: 150-300 lines.

---

Draft Command

---
description: Create change management communications for a feature launch
---

Use the `deliver-change-communication` skill to create targeted change communications.

Read the skill instructions from `skills/deliver-change-communication/SKILL.md` and follow them to guide the user through audience segmentation, impact assessment, and message drafting.

Use `skills/deliver-change-communication/references/TEMPLATE.md` as the output format.

Context from user: $ARGUMENTS

---

AGENTS.md Entry

#### change-communication
**Path:** `skills/deliver-change-communication/SKILL.md`

Creates targeted change management communications for feature launches that alter user workflows. Use when multiple audiences need different messages about what changed, why, and what to do next.

---

---

Validation Checklist

CI Validation

• [x] name matches directory name (deliver-change-communication)
• [x] description is 20-100 words (single-line) - 33 words
• [x] version present ("1.0.0")
• [x] updated present (2026-03-22)
• [x] license present (Apache-2.0)
• [x] Phase/classification: domain skill has phase: deliver, no classification: field
• [x] references/TEMPLATE.md has ≥3 ## sections (6 sections)
• [x] Command file references correct path (skills/deliver-change-communication/SKILL.md)
• [x] AGENTS.md entry uses #### change-communication + **Path:** format

Quality Checks

<!-- count-exempt:start --> <!-- This block is illustrative example output captured at v2.7.0 era; the "27 existing skills" count is intentionally point-in-time and is not a current-state claim. Excluded from check-count-consistency. -->

• [x] references/EXAMPLE.md will be a complete artifact (150-300 lines)
• [x] Output contract present in draft SKILL.md
• [x] Quality checklist present in draft SKILL.md
• [x] Gap analysis checked all 27 existing skills
• [x] Why Gate not triggered (no high overlap - release-notes and launch-checklist serve different purposes)

<!-- count-exempt:end -->

---

Next Steps

1. Review: Read through the packet above. Flag any sections that need changes. 2. Local CI: Run bash scripts/lint-skills-frontmatter.sh after promotion. 3. Test: Try using /change-communication with a realistic feature launch scenario. 4. Contribute: If submitting to pm-skills, create a GitHub issue using the skill-proposal template, then open a PR with the promoted files. 5. Iterate: Use the pm-skill iteration utility (when available) to refine based on testing feedback.

Skill Implementation Packet: {Skill Name}

Created: {date}

Builder version: 1.0.0

Status: Draft | Promoted | Abandoned

---

Decision

{Recommendation: create / revise existing / workflow / command / docs-only}

{Why Gate evidence if applicable - the 2-3 specific prompts or scenarios where existing skills fail}

---

Classification

---

Overlap Analysis

Existing skills checked

{List of skills reviewed during gap analysis}

Findings

{What was found - specific overlap and differentiation}

Why this skill is still needed

{The gap this skill fills that no existing skill covers}

---

Exemplar Skills

---

Draft Frontmatter

<!-- PM-Skills | https://github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills | Apache 2.0 -->
---
name: {skill-name}
description: {20-100 word description on a single line - linter reads first line only}
phase: {phase}          # for domain skills only - omit for foundation/utility
classification: {type}  # for foundation/utility only - omit for domain
version: "1.0.0"
updated: {date}
license: Apache-2.0
metadata:
  category: {category}
  frameworks: [triple-diamond]
  author: product-on-purpose
---

Linter constraint: description: must be a single-line value (no >- or | folding).

The linter extracts only the first line after the key using sed. Multiline YAML

would capture the literal >- string and fail the 20-100 word check.

---

Draft SKILL.md

{Full draft content - not an outline. Includes:

• Title and introductory paragraph
• When to Use section
• When NOT to Use section (if applicable)
• Instructions (numbered steps)
• Output Contract
• Quality Checklist
• Examples reference

Mirrors the section structure of the selected exemplar skill.}

---

Draft TEMPLATE.md

{Section headers with guidance comments for each section. Each section has:

• A ## header
• A brief instruction comment explaining what goes here
• Placeholder structure showing the expected format}

---

Draft EXAMPLE.md

{A complete, realistic example - 150-300 lines.

• Picks a specific PM scenario appropriate to the skill's domain
• Fills every TEMPLATE.md section with concrete content
• Demonstrates optional sections both filled and skipped
• Shows what "good" looks like for ambiguous sections}

---

Draft Command

---
description: {One-line description of what the command does}
---

Use the `{skill-name}` skill to {primary action}.

Read the skill instructions from `skills/{directory-name}/SKILL.md` and follow them to {describe the task}.

Use `skills/{directory-name}/references/TEMPLATE.md` as the output format.

Context from user: $ARGUMENTS

Convention: Command files use only description: in frontmatter. No name,

arguments, or skill_file fields. The optional idea argument is handled via

$ARGUMENTS in the prose body, matching all existing commands.

---

AGENTS.md Entry

#### {skill-name}
**Path:** `skills/{directory-name}/SKILL.md`

{1-2 sentence description. Imperative verb start, use-case focus.}

---

Convention: Level-4 header (kebab-case skill name), **Path:** line,

blank line, description paragraph, --- separator. No **Command:** field.

Must pass validate-agents-md.sh which checks path ↔ directory sync.

---

Validation Checklist

CI Validation (must pass - enforced by linter + validators)

• [ ] name matches directory name
• [ ] description is 20-100 words (single-line, no >-)
• [ ] version present (exactly one root-level, no metadata.version)
• [ ] updated present (ISO date format)
• [ ] license present (Apache-2.0)
• [ ] Phase/classification consistency (domain has phase:, foundation/utility has classification:)
• [ ] references/TEMPLATE.md exists with ≥3 ## sections
• [ ] Command file references correct skill path (validate-commands.sh)
• [ ] AGENTS.md entry uses #### {name} + **Path:** format (validate-agents-md.sh)

Quality Checks (should pass - builder-enforced, not CI-gated)

• [ ] references/EXAMPLE.md is a complete artifact (150-300 lines), not an outline
• [ ] Output contract present in SKILL.md
• [ ] Quality checklist present in SKILL.md
• [ ] Gap analysis checked all existing skills (not just same-phase)
• [ ] Why Gate evidence is specific (names prompts/scenarios, not vague)

---

Next Steps

1. Review: Read through the packet above. Flag any sections that need changes. 2. Local CI: Run bash scripts/lint-skills-frontmatter.sh after promotion. 3. Test: Try using /{command-name} with a realistic PM scenario. 4. Contribute: If submitting to pm-skills, create a GitHub issue using the skill-proposal template, then open a PR with the promoted files. 5. Iterate: Use the pm-skill iteration utility (when available) to refine based on testing feedback.