internal-comms

A set of resources to help write internal communications in common company formats. Use when asked to write internal communications (status reports, leadership updates, 3P updates, company newsletters, FAQs, incident reports, project updates, etc.).

Quality

83%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

The canonical home for this skill is internal-comms in anthropics/skills

Quality

Content

77%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a clean, concise overview that routes Claude to per-format guideline files with a clear fallback — good conciseness and workflow clarity for a simple skill. Its main weakness is that the four example files it depends on are absent from the bundle, leaving the actual formatting guidance and the progressive-disclosure structure unfulfilled.

Suggestions

Add the missing examples/ directory with the four referenced files (3p-updates.md, company-newsletter.md, faq-answers.md, general-comms.md) so the body's navigation resolves to real content.

Inline a brief, concrete snippet of guidance per format (e.g. a one-line structural skeleton for a 3P update) so the body is actionable even before an example file is loaded.

Either confirm the example file paths exactly match the filenames in the "Load the appropriate guideline file" list, or remove references to any file not shipped in the bundle, to avoid dangling links.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is roughly 25 lean lines with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section (When to use, How to use, Keywords) earns its place. Not 2 because there is no unnecessary explanation to trim.	3 / 3
Actionability	The numbered workflow gives concrete file routing (e.g. "examples/3p-updates.md - For Progress/Plans/Problems team updates"), but the actual formatting/tone/content-gathering guidance is deferred to the example files rather than given inline. Not 3 because step 3 ("Follow the specific instructions in that file") is abstract rather than copy-paste-ready guidance within the body itself.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The simple routing task is laid out as an unambiguous three-step sequence (identify type → load guideline file → follow its instructions) with an explicit fallback ("ask for clarification or more context"). Not 2 because, per the simple-skills note, this is a single non-destructive task whose action is unambiguous, so no validation checkpoint is required.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	References are one level deep and clearly signaled (a mapped list of four examples/*.md files), but none of those referenced files exist in the bundle — references/, scripts/, assets/, and examples/ are all absent, so the navigation points to dangling files. Not 1 because the structure is well-organized and not monolithic or nested; not 3 because the disclosed-to files are missing, so the navigation is broken in practice.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is strong: it explicitly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with a broad set of natural trigger terms covering the main internal-comms formats. The only soft spot is specificity, since it names one action ("write") and lists communication types rather than distinct concrete capabilities.

Suggestions

Replace or augment "help write" with concrete verbs (e.g. "draft, format, and structure") so the capability list reads as multiple specific actions rather than a single action plus a list of output types.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"A set of resources to help write internal communications in common company formats" names the domain and the single action "write" plus several communication types, but it does not list multiple distinct concrete actions (e.g. draft, format, structure, review) that would warrant a 3. It clears 2 because the domain and some actions are named, just not comprehensively.	2 / 3
Completeness	"A set of resources to help write internal communications in common company formats" answers what, and "Use when asked to write internal communications (...)" answers when with an explicit trigger clause. It is not 2 because the when guidance is explicit, not merely implied.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The parenthetical "status reports, leadership updates, 3P updates, company newsletters, FAQs, incident reports, project updates" gives good coverage of natural terms a user would actually say. Not below 3 because no common variation is conspicuously missing for this domain.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The internal-communications-in-company-formats niche with specific named formats (3P updates, newsletters, incident reports) is a clear niche with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. Not 2 because the triggers are specific enough to avoid meaningful overlap.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: shareAI-lab/Kode-CLI
Path: packages/builtin-skills/skills/internal-comms/SKILL.md
Commit: 4afba64

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

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.