pre-meeting-context
Skill8 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use this skill before any meeting with a client, partner, prospect, or recurring contact. Triggers on phrases like "prep for [name]", "I have a meeting with [name]", "meeting brief for [company]", or when the user references an upcoming call with a specific person. Produces a one-page briefing with relationship history, open items, and suggested talking points.
In this repository9 other files it gives its agents.
- competitor-readSkill
- consultant-translatorSkill
- contract-redlineSkill
- decision-audit-trailSkill
- feedback-themesSkill
- investor-updateSkill
- panel-synthesizerSkill
- talk-to-assetsSkill
- weekly-reviewSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
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 18
If the user only provides a name, ask once for clarifying scope (which company, what context).
- Distinctive: line 59
Use plain language. The reader is doing this between two other meetings and has 90 seconds to skim.
- Distinctive: line 61
If data is missing for a section, say so explicitly ("No prior meeting notes available") rather than making things up.
≈ “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
Pre-Meeting Context Warmer
When to use this skill
The user is preparing for a meeting with a specific person or company. They want the same context they would have walking in if they had a chief of staff who had memorized the relationship. Not a smart-sounding agenda. A real briefing.
Input the user provides
- Name of the person or company they are meeting with
- Optionally: time of meeting, purpose, channel (in-person, video, phone)
- Optionally: pointers to email threads, CRM, notes, or shared docs
If the user only provides a name, ask once for clarifying scope (which company, what context). Do not ask multiple rounds of questions.
What this skill does
- Gathers what is available about the relationship:
- Last 6 months of email exchanges (if accessible)
- Documented meeting notes from prior calls
- Open threads, pending asks on either side
- Concerns or objections this person has named in past conversations
- Their role, reporting line, and decision-making authority if known
- Produces a one-page briefing in the structure below.
Output structure
# Meeting Brief: [Name / Company]
*[Date and time of meeting]*
## Relationship Snapshot
- One paragraph on who this person is, what they care about, where this relationship stands
- Last meaningful interaction (when, what, outcome)
## Open Items
- Pending asks from them to us (with status)
- Pending asks from us to them (with status)
- Unresolved questions from the last conversation
## Suggested Talking Points
- 2-4 things worth raising, ordered by importance
- For each, one sentence on why it matters now
## Risks and Things to Avoid
- Topics this person has reacted poorly to in the past
- Commitments we made that we have not yet delivered on (acknowledge upfront)
- Politically sensitive items in their organizationCalibration notes
- Length cap: one page. If the briefing runs longer, cut talking points first, then relationship snapshot.
- Use plain language. The reader is doing this between two other meetings and has 90 seconds to skim.
- Surface the uncomfortable items in "Risks and Things to Avoid" rather than burying them. The hidden veto in a meeting is usually a commitment we forgot we made.
- If data is missing for a section, say so explicitly ("No prior meeting notes available") rather than making things up.
When NOT to use this skill
- Internal meetings with team members the user works with daily
- Group meetings where the prep is shared, not personal
- First-time introductions where there is no prior context to retrieve
For those, a lighter agenda template is more appropriate.
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.

