Surface a matched excerpt from Jerry Madden's NASA project-management aphorisms (LLIS #1956) at the moment it fits: incident root-cause sections; ticket refinement; plan drafting; status updates; escalation calls. Loads only one category at a time — never the full list, never more than three aphorisms per response. DO NOT use this for regulatory, legal, or prize-dispute decisions; route those to Legal/Compliance/DPO. Triggers: 'root cause', 'refine this ticket', 'draft a plan', 'status update', 'should I escalate', 'stakeholder comms'.
65
77%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Passed
No findings from the security scan
Fix and improve this skill with Tessl
tessl review fix ./skills/project-mgmt/nasa-pm-lessons/SKILL.mdJerry Madden, former Associate Director of Flight Projects, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center — aphorisms collected over 37 years, first published in ASK Magazine, October 2003. https://llis.nasa.gov/lesson/1956
The reference files below paraphrase the source in each category's own words rather than quoting it at length — treat them as a judgment aid, not a verbatim transcript. Consult the source URL for Madden's original phrasing and full elaboration.
Only apply this skill when the situation actually matches one of the trigger scenarios below. If it doesn't, skip this skill entirely rather than forcing a fit.
| Scenario | Load |
|---|---|
| Root cause / incident writeup (journal troubleshooting entries) | references/design-engineering.md |
| Ticket refinement, implementation plan drafting, wave planning | references/planning-and-decisions.md |
| Status comment to management, escalation call | references/working-with-superiors.md |
| Stakeholder comms, incident status to non-engineers, vendor/partner comms | references/customer-stakeholder-relations.md |
| Retro notes, team roster entries, 1:1 or standup prep | references/managing-project-staff.md |
| Vendor/contractor friction or negotiation | references/contractor-relations.md |
| Anything else | Skip this skill unless a genuine match appears above |
references/*.md fileBefore treating a Madden aphorism as settled guidance for anything stakeholder-facing or regulated, wait for explicit confirmation from the responsible function (Legal, Compliance, or equivalent) whenever the topic touches a regulatory or externally-facing decision — this skill only produces internal judgment framing, never the final call.
cargo run -p pantheon-skill-auditor -- evaluate project-mgmt/nasa-pm-lessons --json --storeResult: a JSON score report across the 9-dimension framework — treat anything below a B grade as not yet production-ready.
Working with Superiors — LLIS #1956: "Never ask management to make a decision that you can make."
Applied: this status update is yours to send; don't route it through your manager first.Result: one line, attributed, applied — not a dump of the whole category.
If the matched reference file is missing, or nothing in the matched category actually fits the situation, say so directly and skip the citation — forcing an aphorism where none fits is worse than citing none.
NEVER paste an entire category's list into a journal entry, ticket comment, or status update. WHY: it turns a judgment nudge into noise and defeats the point of category scoping — the main pitfall this skill guards against. BAD: "Per NASA LLIS #1956, here are the 20 planning lessons to consider..." GOOD: one line, attributed, applied to the specific decision in front of you.
NEVER treat this skill as authority for a stakeholder-facing regulatory, legal, or customer-dispute decision. WHY: those are decision-support domains requiring a documented human decision — an aphorism is not a substitute. BAD: citing Madden's "know your customer" aphorism as the basis for resolving a customer dispute. GOOD: use it for internal judgment framing only, and route anything regulator-facing to the correct function.
NEVER force a citation when nothing in the matched category actually fits the situation. WHY: a fabricated-fit aphorism reads as filler and erodes trust in the citations that are genuinely useful. BAD: stretching a "Working with Superiors" line to cover a pure design-engineering root cause just because that was the category loaded. GOOD: say plainly that nothing fits, skip the citation, and move on.
| Category | File |
|---|---|
| Design Engineering | references/design-engineering.md |
| Planning, Decision-Making, Documentation, Reporting | references/planning-and-decisions.md |
| Managing Project Staff | references/managing-project-staff.md |
| Working with Superiors | references/working-with-superiors.md |
| Customer/Stakeholder Relations | references/customer-stakeholder-relations.md |
| Contractor Relations | references/contractor-relations.md |
a1083f4
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.