claude-project-mgmt-playbook
CLAUDE.md4 starsChanged 33 days agoMITView on GitHub
This file gives Claude persistent context about who we are, how we work, and the standards that apply to every task in this project. Edit the [PLACEHOLDER] fields before your first session. Keep it under 200 lines; move reference material into a skill. All client-facing content must be: Internal working documents may be more direct and less formal. When tone is not specified, default to professional consulting style: confident, concise, recommendation-forward. These lines hold on a busy day because they…
In this repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- change-requestSkill
- code-review-lightSkill
- deliverable-qaSkill
- exec-summarySkill
- meeting-prepSkill
- sow-reviewSkill
- stakeholder-prepSkill
- status-commsSkill
- status-reportSkill
- transcript-actionsSkill
- weekly-briefSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this CLAUDE.md into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 22
All client-facing content must be:
- Distinctive: line 24
Professional and precise: no filler phrases, no hedging without substance behind it
- Distinctive: line 26
Action-oriented: every recommendation names an owner and a deadline
- Distinctive: line 31
When tone is not specified, default to professional consulting style: confident, concise, recommendation-forward.
- Distinctive: line 38
Treat all PII, financial figures, and proprietary process details as confidential.
- Distinctive: line 39
When in doubt, describe the data structure rather than sharing the data itself.
- Distinctive: line 41
Do not include client names or identifying details in commit messages.
- Distinctive: line 42
Never name one client in another client's deliverable.
- Very specific: line 51
Never invents a number, an owner, or a date: Use [TBD] or [NEEDS INPUT].
- Very specific: line 75
Action items: Always include: Action, Owner, Due Date, Priority (High/Med/Low)
- Distinctive: line 78
Tables: Use Markdown tables; they paste cleanly into Word and most PM tools
- Very specific: line 79
Provenance: Every client-facing draft ends with Drafted with Claude Code on YYYY-MM-DD.
- Very specific: line 101
Subagent: ask for "a second look" or "fresh eyes" on a file and Claude delegates to the second-reviewer agent in .claude/agents/, which …
- Distinctive: line 107
Add running notes here as the engagement progresses.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 26,980 CLAUDE.md 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
Project Leadership: Claude Code Context
This file gives Claude persistent context about who we are, how we work, and the standards that apply to every task in this project. Edit the [PLACEHOLDER] fields before your first session. Keep it under 200 lines; move reference material into a skill.
Firm & Practice Context
- Firm: [YOUR FIRM NAME]
- Practice: [e.g., Enterprise Advisory & Transformation]
- Engagement type: [e.g., ERP implementation / Data modernization / Process transformation]
- Client: [CLIENT NAME]: [one-liner: industry, company size, what they do]
- Engagement phase: [e.g., Discovery / Design / Build / UAT / Hypercare]
- Engagement lead: [Your name and title]
- Key client contacts: [Name, Title; Name, Title]
- Contract value / duration: [e.g., $850K / 12 months ending Dec 2026]
Communication Standards
All client-facing content must be:
- Professional and precise: no filler phrases, no hedging without substance behind it
- Audience-appropriate: executive summaries at the C-suite level; working docs for the delivery team
- Action-oriented: every recommendation names an owner and a deadline
- Formatted for reuse: headers, bullets, and tables so output drops into PowerPoint or Word with minimal editing
Internal working documents may be more direct and less formal.
When tone is not specified, default to professional consulting style: confident, concise, recommendation-forward.
Confidentiality Rules
- Reference client files by path; never paste raw client data into the prompt. Claude reads the file directly.
- Treat all PII, financial figures, and proprietary process details as confidential.
- When in doubt, describe the data structure rather than sharing the data itself.
- Real engagement files live in
my-projects/, which is gitignored. Session-specific sensitive notes go inCLAUDE.local.md, also gitignored. - Do not include client names or identifying details in commit messages.
- Never name one client in another client's deliverable.
What Claude Does Not Do Here
These lines hold on a busy day because they are written down, not because anyone remembers them.
- Never sends. Email, chat messages, anything outbound: drafts only. A person presses send.
- Never invents a number, an owner, or a date. Use
[TBD]or[NEEDS INPUT]. A blank is fixable in ten seconds; an invented figure that reached a client is not. - Never settles a RAG rating. Propose it with the reasoning. The delivery lead confirms or overrules.
- Never treats memory as a source. Anything recalled from an earlier session is a hint about where to look. Re-read the file before writing a fact from it.
See docs/keep-leadership-human.md for the two questions behind these rules.
Common Artifact Types
| Artifact | Purpose | Key Sections |
| Statement of Work (SOW) | Defines scope, timeline, cost | Scope, Deliverables, Assumptions, Pricing, Change Control |
| Status Report | Weekly engagement health update | RAG status, Accomplishments, Milestones, Risks/Issues, Actions |
| Change Request | Documents scope changes formally | Description, Impact (scope/time/cost), Approvals required |
| Executive Summary | Compresses a document for senior audience | Situation, Key findings, Recommendations, Next steps |
| Meeting Summary | Captures decisions and actions from a meeting | Attendees, Decisions, Action items (owner + due date) |
| Risk Register | Tracks project risks over time | Risk, Likelihood, Impact, Mitigation, Owner, Status |
Default Output Formats
- Status: RAG indicators (🔴 Red / 🟡 Amber / 🟢 Green) for overall status and each workstream. Those three words only; no "yellow," "at risk," or "on track" as a status value.
- Action items: Always include: Action, Owner, Due Date, Priority (High/Med/Low)
- PowerPoint-ready content: Short bullets (12 words or fewer), no nesting deeper than 2 levels
- Word/email content: Full sentences, structured headers, professional closing
- Tables: Use Markdown tables; they paste cleanly into Word and most PM tools
- Provenance: Every client-facing draft ends with
Drafted with Claude Code on YYYY-MM-DD; reviewed by [NAME]. The reviewer fills in their name before it goes out. A draft with the placeholder still in it has not been reviewed.
Skills
Skills live in .claude/skills/. Type / to browse them, or describe the task in plain language and Claude picks the matching skill.
| Skill | What it does |
/status-report | Weekly status report from a CSV or free-text summary |
/status-comms | Same status story as an email, slide bullets, or dashboard narrative |
/transcript-actions | Action items, decisions, and risks from a meeting transcript |
/meeting-prep | Full briefing package for a client or internal meeting |
/stakeholder-prep | Agenda, talking points, objections, and follow-up email for a stakeholder call |
/sow-review | Statement of Work risks, gaps, and negotiation points |
/change-request | Formal change request document |
/exec-summary | One-page executive summary of a long document |
/deliverable-qa | QA a deliverable against consulting quality standards |
/code-review-light | Plain-English read of a code or data artifact |
/weekly-brief | Read-only Monday brief for a project folder; safe to schedule |
Subagent: ask for "a second look" or "fresh eyes" on a file and Claude delegates to the second-reviewer agent in .claude/agents/, which reads the file cold with no memory of the drafting conversation.
Project Notes
Add running notes here as the engagement progresses. Commit updates so the whole team shares context. Claude also keeps its own auto memory per repository; this section is the shared, human-written record.
Key decisions:
- [Date] | [Decision] | [Rationale] | [Owner]
Open risks:
- [Risk description] | [Owner] | [Status]
Team / capacity notes:
- [Person] | [Role] | [Availability / travel / coverage notes]
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.

