board-update

When the user needs to write a monthly or quarterly investor update, prepare a board deck, or communicate company progress to stakeholders.

Quality

57%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/board-update/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%

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

This is a strong, highly actionable skill that provides domain-specific frameworks and concrete examples for board/investor communications. Its main weakness is length — at ~200+ lines with multiple inline frameworks, it could benefit from splitting detailed reference material into separate files. The workflow is clear, the examples are excellent, and the guidance is specific enough to produce high-quality outputs.

Suggestions

Move the detailed 11-section framework table, metrics presentation rules, and cadence guidelines into a separate BOARD-UPDATE-REFERENCE.md file, keeping only the workflow and key principles in SKILL.md.

Trim editorial commentary like 'Investors forgive bad quarters. They do not forgive founders who hide problems until they become crises.' — these are persuasive asides that don't change Claude's behavior.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is fairly comprehensive and most content earns its place as domain-specific knowledge Claude wouldn't inherently know (the 11-section framework, bad-news protocol, metrics rules). However, there's some verbosity in explanatory asides ('Boards see 10+ decks per quarter', 'Investors forgive bad quarters. They do not forgive founders who hide problems until they become crises.') and the common mistakes section partially overlaps with guidance already given in other sections.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides highly concrete, actionable guidance: specific section frameworks with owners, exact word/slide counts, a complete example investor email with formatted metrics table, specific bad-news delivery steps, and concrete examples of good vs. bad asks ('any intros would be great' vs. 'intro to VP Ops at Stripe'). The examples are copy-paste ready templates.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 6-step workflow is clearly sequenced with decision points (format determination based on stage), explicit structure for each section (Headline-Data-Narrative-Ask/Next), and the bad-news protocol provides a clear feedback loop. The four-act narrative structure serves as a validation checkpoint for explaining variances. For a content-generation skill (non-destructive), this level of workflow clarity is excellent.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is quite long with all content inline — the 11-section framework table, multiple sub-frameworks (bad-news delivery, four-act narrative, metrics rules, cadence guidelines, common mistakes), and two examples all live in one file. The frameworks and detailed tables could be split into referenced files. However, it does use clear headers and tables for organization, and references related skills at the end.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

37%

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

This description functions purely as a 'when to use' clause without ever explaining what the skill actually does. While it contains excellent trigger terms that would help Claude match user requests, the complete absence of capability descriptions means Claude cannot assess whether this skill will produce the right output. It needs a 'what' component describing concrete actions.

Suggestions

Add a clear 'what' clause listing specific capabilities, e.g., 'Generates structured investor update templates with sections for KPIs, financial highlights, milestones, and asks. Formats board deck outlines with executive summaries and data visualizations.'

Restructure to lead with capabilities followed by the existing trigger clause, e.g., 'Drafts investor updates, structures board decks, and summarizes company metrics for stakeholder communications. Use when the user needs to write a monthly or quarterly investor update...'

Specify output formats or deliverables (e.g., 'produces markdown drafts, slide outlines, or email-ready updates') to distinguish from general writing or presentation skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description does not list any concrete actions or capabilities. It only describes when to use the skill ('write a monthly or quarterly investor update, prepare a board deck') but never states what the skill actually does (e.g., 'generates templates', 'formats financial metrics', 'creates slide outlines').	1 / 3
Completeness	The description answers 'when' clearly but completely fails to answer 'what does this do'. There is no indication of the skill's capabilities or outputs. Per the rubric, missing 'what' OR 'when' should result in a score of 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Contains strong natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'investor update', 'board deck', 'quarterly', 'monthly', 'stakeholders', 'company progress'. These are terms a user would naturally use when requesting this type of help.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The domain of investor updates and board decks is fairly specific and unlikely to conflict with most skills. However, without stating what the skill actually does, it could overlap with general writing, presentation, or reporting skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: shawnpang/startup-founder-skills
Commit: 4ad31b4

Reviewed: 4 months 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.