Turn raw PM content into a compliant, publish-ready skill. Use when creating or updating a repo skill without breaking standards.

Purpose Create or update PM skills without chaos. This workflow turns rough notes, workshop content, or half baked prompt dumps into compliant skills/<skill name /SKILL.md assets that actually pass validation and belong in this repo. Use it when you want to ship a new skill without "looks good to me" roulette. Input Bring the raw material and the intent — rough is fine; the workflow exists to get it the rest of the way: Works best with: the source content (notes, transcript, framework, prompt sequence) or the existing skill you want to update Also useful: the intended skill type (component/interactive/workflow), target audience, and any naming preference If you supply this inline with your request (e.g., "turn research/pricing workshop notes.md into an interactive advisor"), the workflow starts at Phase 1 with that context — it won't re ask for what you already gave. If you provide nothing, it opens by asking what content you want to turn into a skill and offers the entry modes from the facilitation protocol. Example: Use skill authoring workflow: convert research/pricing workshop notes.md into an interactive pricing advisor. Key Concepts Dogfood First Use repo native tools and standards before inventing a custom process: scripts/find a skill.sh scripts/add a skill.sh scripts/build a skill.sh scripts/test a skill.sh scripts/check skill metadata.py Pick the Right Creation Path Guided wizard ( build a skill.sh ) : Best when you have an idea but not final prose. Content first generator ( add a skill.sh ) : Best when you already have source content. Manual edit + validate : Best for tightening an existing skill. Definition of Done (No Exceptions) A skill is done only when: 1. Frontmatter is valid ( name , description , intent , type ) 2. Section order is compliant (Purpose, Input, Key Concepts, Application, Examples, Common Pitfalls, References) 3. Metadata limits are respected ( name <= 64 chars, description <= 200 chars) 4. Description says both what the skill does and when to use it 5. The Input section says what the user can bring, shows an example invocation, tells the agent to use inline input instead of re asking, and makes clear that arriving with partial or zero input is fine — in plain language, never runtime template syntax like $ARGUMENTS (rationale: CONTRIBUTING.md, "Why We Don't Use $ARGUMENTS ") 6. Intent carries the fuller repo facing summary without replacing the trigger oriented description 7. Cross references resolve 8. README catalog counts and tables are updated (if adding/removing skills) Facilitation Source of Truth When running this workflow as a guided conversation, use [ workshop facilitation ](../workshop facilitation/SKILL.md) as the interaction protocol. It defines: session heads up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess) one question turns with plain language prompts progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5) interruption handling and pause/resume behavior numbered recommendations at decision points quick select numbered response options for regular questions (include Other (specify) when useful) This file defines the workflow sequence and domain specific outputs. If there is a conflict, follow this file's workflow logic. Application Phase 1: Preflight (Avoid Duplicate Work) 1. Search for overlapping skills: 2. Decide type: Component : one artifact/template Interactive : 3 5 adaptive questions + numbered options Workflow : multi phase orchestration Phase 2: Generate Draft If you have source material: If you want guided prompts: Phase 3: Tighten the Skill Manually review for: Clear "when to use" guidance One concrete example — optimally two, from different business domains (one SaaS, one industrial/non SaaS), so the framework visibly generalizes; reuse the repo's fictional universes (Fieldlight/Wrenchline for SaaS, Helix/Northfield/Corvid for industrial) and suffix the second file by domain ( sample industrial.md ) A template.md when the skill produces an artifact — the output schema as a copy/paste fill in with quality checks One explicit anti pattern No filler or vague consultant speak Phase 4: Validate Hard Run strict checks before thinking about commit: Phase 5: Integrate with Repo Docs If this is a new skill: 1. Add it to the correct README category table 2. Update skill totals and category counts 3. Verify link paths resolve Phase 6: Optional Packaging If targeting Claude custom skill upload: Examples Example: Turn Workshop Notes into a Skill Input: research/pricing workshop notes.md Goal: new interactive advisor Expected result: New skill folder exists Skill passes structural and metadata checks README catalog entry added/updated Anti Pattern Example "We wrote a cool skill, skipped validation, forgot README counts, and shipped anyway." Result: Broken references Inconsistent catalog numbers Confusion for contributors and users Common Pitfalls Shipping vibes, not standards. Choosing workflow when the task is really a component template. Bloated descriptions that exceed upload limits. Descriptions that say what the skill is but not when Claude should trigger it. Descriptions that silently hit the 200 char limit and get cut off mid thought. Letting intent become a substitute for a weak trigger description. Forgetting to update README counts after adding a skill. Treating generated output as final without review. References README.md AGENTS.md CLAUDE.md docs/Building PM Skills.md docs/Add a Skill Utility Guide.md Anthropic's [Complete Guide to Building Skills for Claude](https://resources.anthropic.com/hubfs/The Complete Guide to Building Skill for Claude.pdf) scripts/add a skill.sh scripts/build a skill.sh scripts/find a skill.sh scripts/test a skill.sh scripts/check skill metadata.py scripts/check skill triggers.py scripts/zip a skill.sh

skill-authoring-workflow