commitments
Skill2 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user says "commitments ledger", "who promised what", "what did we agree to", "what are they on the hook for", "pull the promises out of this thread", "log the action items from this call". Produces a ledger of every firm promise on both sides (owner, what, due date and how it was derived, quote, status), a separate soft list, the three to close first and a nudge for their most overdue item. Not for the follow-up emails after a call (use call-recap) or a promise handover to a successor (use handoff).
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- davekilleen/Dextheir own version, first seen Aug 31, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- davekilleen/Dex★ 509same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository54 other files it gives its agents.
- account-contextSkill
- account-planSkill
- account-reviewSkill
- adoption-planSkill
- advocacy-askSkill
- book-reviewSkill
- book-triageSkill
- business-reviewSkill
- call-prepSkill
- call-recapSkill
- champion-lossSkill
- churn-postmortemSkill
- coachingSkill
- coverage-modelSkill
- csm-hiringSkill
- csm-rampSkill
- csql-motionSkill
- cs-scorecardSkill
- cs-startSkill
- customer-updateSkill
- day-planSkill
- email-criticSkill
- escalationSkill
- exec-conversationSkill
- expansion-caseSkill
- expansion-scanSkill
- handoffSkill
- hard-conversationSkill
- health-scoreSkill
- internal-askSkill
- invoice-chaseSkill
- mutual-action-planSkill
- nrr-narrativeSkill
- offboardingSkill
- onboarding-planSkill
- one-pagerSkill
- playbook-builderSkill
- portfolio-reviewSkill
- price-increaseSkill
- renewal-forecastSkill
- renewal-negotiationSkill
- renewal-riskSkill
- renewal-runwaySkill
- sales-handoffSkill
- save-planSkill
- stakeholder-mapSkill
- status-updateSkill
- survey-follow-upSkill
- team-rollupSkill
- usage-emailSkill
- value-ledgerSkill
- voice-of-customerSkill
- what-do-i-oweSkill
- skill-nameSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 60
Slip out loud: If an ours item will miss, tell them before the date with a new date, because a quiet miss costs more than a late delivery.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Commitments
A two-sided ledger of what was promised, by whom and by when, from a pasted transcript or thread, so nothing owed slips and nothing owed to you goes unchased.
Start here
If the user pasted a transcript, thread or notes, go. Also useful: the date of the call or thread, who is who (ours vs theirs), and today's date. If the date is missing, say "dates resolved from today (assumed, confirm)". Otherwise ask for the text and the date in ONE message, then proceed with whatever comes back. If an "Account context" block exists, use it for names.
Do this
- Find the binding sentences. A firm promise has a named owner, a deliverable and no hedge. Quote the words, under 25.
- Sort the rest. Hedged intent ("I'll try", "let us look at", "we should") goes on a soft list, not the ledger. Requests, deadlines and hopes are not promises: file them as context.
- Resolve every date from the call date. Mark each
statedorimplied. Where a relative date has two readings ("next Wednesday"), list both and ask. - Carry in older promises that were mentioned ("last time you said"). Age runs from the first promise, not the latest restatement.
- Set status as of today: open, due today, overdue (days), done, or blocked by whom.
- Pick three to close first by consequence, not order: due today, then anything others are waiting on, then the overdue promise that gates their goal.
- Draft one short nudge for the most overdue of theirs. Ours become one-line tasks with a date. Drafts only, the user sends.
Output
COMMITMENTS: [Account] | source [call/thread, date] | as of [date]
[n] firm open ([n] ours, [n] theirs) | [n] soft | [n] overdue
| # | Side | Owner | What | Due | Date basis | Quote | Status |
Soft (not counted, watch)
- [who] "[words]" - why it is soft
Not promises
- [constraint, request or hope] - why it is not ours or theirs
Close first
1. [item] - [why now]
Our tasks: [one line each, with date]
Nudge to [name] (re: #[n])
[draft]
Flag: [anything to verify before sending]
What I could not check
- [gap]A filled example is in examples/sample.md.
Rules
- A maybe is not a promise. Upgrading "let us look at it" to a ledger line makes the user owe something nobody agreed, and the customer will remember it as agreed.
- Never record a promise nobody made. A customer deadline ("finance needs it by the 20th") is their constraint, not our commitment, until someone says "I will".
- Implied dates get confirmed, not trusted. Two people hear "next Wednesday" as two different days, and the miss is found only when it is late.
- Age is a relationship cost. Count from the first promise. A re-promise resets their clock but not the real one, and a third restatement means something else is going on.
- Slip out loud. If an ours item will miss, tell them before the date with a new date, because a quiet miss costs more than a late delivery.
- Their overdue promise is leverage and a signal. It often means their priorities moved. Tie the nudge to the goal it blocks and ask what changed before pressing.
- Product, price, security and legal items are "verify before confirming". The user checks them, never this ledger, because a confirmed untruth is worse than a late answer.
- Every count names its measure: "6 firm open", not "6 items".
Related (only if installed)
call-recap for the emails the call generated. handoff to pass the open promises to a successor. value-ledger for proof of results.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

