1on1-agenda
Skill0 starsChanged 39 days agoMITView on GitHub
Structures recurring manager-report 1:1s with a rolling shared agenda that balances check-in, blockers, two-way feedback, and career growth instead of status updates. Use when someone asks "what should I cover in my 1:1s", "build me a 1:1 agenda template", "my 1:1s have turned into status meetings", or is setting up 1:1s with new reports. Do NOT use for general meeting agendas - use meeting-agenda instead; for writing a formal review document, use performance-review-writer; for drafting a specific piece of feedback, use feedback-writer.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- SkillMedev/remote-team-toolkitword for word, first seen Oct 5, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- SkillMedev/remote-team-toolkit★ 0100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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 repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- eng-status-rollupSkill
- feedback-writerSkill
- hiring-scorecardSkill
- performance-review-writerSkill
- sprint-retro-facilitatorSkill
- team-health-checkSkill
- tech-debt-prioritizerSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈12
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 20
Before setting up (or fixing) a 1:1 practice, establish:
- Distinctive: line 29
Keep one shared, persistent doc per report, visible to both.
- Distinctive: line 34
Never cancel without rescheduling.
- Distinctive: line 40
Check-in (always): "How are you doing - really?" Energy, workload, life.
- Distinctive: line 94
Do not let the 1:1 become a status report - that is what standups and written updates are for.
- Distinctive: line 95
Do not do most of the talking - target the report leading 70%.
- Distinctive: line 96
Do not cancel without rescheduling, or routinely cut it short - both tell the report they are low priority, and they remember.
- Distinctive: line 97
Do not defer career conversations to review season - growth is continuous, and review-time surprises are a management failure.
- Distinctive: line 98
Do not run it agenda-less from memory - cold starts waste the first ten minutes and dropped threads erode trust.
- Distinctive: line 99
Do not use the 1:1 to deliver a formal review verdict - that is a separate, prepared conversation (performance-review-writer).
- Distinctive: line 105
Check-in happens every single session.
- Distinctive: line 107
Every action item has an owner and is reviewed at the next open.
≈ “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
1:1 Agenda
The 1:1 is the manager's highest-leverage meeting, and it belongs to the report. The costly failure it prevents is invisible until it isn't: the resignation that "came out of nowhere", the burnout nobody asked about, the career stagnation that festered because growth only came up at review season. A structured rolling agenda keeps the meeting about the human, not the task list.
Core principle
The 1:1 is their meeting. Status belongs in standups and written updates; this time is protected for what does not fit there - blockers, growth, feedback, and how they are actually doing. The report should lead roughly 70% of the talking. If the manager is doing most of it, the meeting has become a broadcast.
Operating procedure
Step 1: Gather inputs
Before setting up (or fixing) a 1:1 practice, establish:
- The reports and their seniority. Default cadence is weekly; biweekly only for very senior, autonomous people - and treat that as the exception to justify, not the default.
- Meeting length: 30 minutes minimum. Under 30, the check-in gets skipped and the meeting degrades to status.
- Where status currently lives (standup, written update, dashboard). If nowhere, fix that first, or status will recolonize the 1:1 no matter what the agenda says.
- Any history to carry in: existing career goals, recent feedback, open action items.
Step 2: Set up the rolling agenda doc
Keep one shared, persistent doc per report, visible to both. Both parties add items between meetings - this kills "so... how's it going?" cold starts and creates continuity across weeks. The doc, not memory, carries action items and career threads.
Step 3: Schedule for trust
- Same time, recurring, weekly. Predictability builds trust.
- Never cancel without rescheduling. Cancelling signals the report does not matter; a rescheduled 15 minutes beats a skipped 30.
Step 4: Run the balanced agenda
Cover these over time - not all every week:
- Check-in (always): "How are you doing - really?" Energy, workload, life. Never skip it; it is the early-warning system.
- Their topics first: blockers, decisions they need, things on their mind. Their items outrank the manager's.
- Current work: only the parts that need the manager - unblocking, prioritization, context. Not a status walk-through.
- Feedback, both ways: give specific feedback using SBI (pair with feedback-writer), and ask "what could I do better?" Asking is what makes giving safe.
- Career and growth, revisited monthly: progress toward goals, skills, opportunities. If a month passes without it, it goes first on the next agenda.
Step 5: Go deeper than status with the question bank
Rotate these when the agenda is thin - a thin agenda usually means the real topics feel unsafe, not that nothing is happening:
- "What's the most frustrating part of your work right now?"
- "What would make next week better than this one?"
- "Where do you want to grow that you're not getting to?"
- "Is there anything I'm doing (or not doing) that's making your job harder?"
- "What are you most proud of since we last talked?"
Step 6: Follow up
- Capture action items with owners in the doc; open the next meeting by reviewing them. Following through is how trust compounds - a dropped action item teaches the report that raising things changes nothing.
- Note career conversations as they happen, so advocacy at review and promotion time cites specifics instead of vibes.
Template: rolling 1:1 doc
Copy once per report and keep it alive:
# 1:1 - [FILL: Manager] & [FILL: Report]
Cadence: [FILL: weekly, day/time] Length: [FILL: >=30 min]
## This week
- [FILL: their topics - always first]
- [FILL: manager topics]
## Parking lot
- [FILL: bigger items to schedule dedicated time for]
## Action items (review at open, carry until done)
- [ ] [FILL: item] - [FILL: owner] - [FILL: due]
## Career & growth (revisit monthly - last discussed: [FILL: date])
- Goals: [FILL]
- Development areas: [FILL]
- Evidence to cite at review time: [FILL: running list]
## Feedback log (both directions, SBI format)
- [FILL: date - given/received - one line]Deliverable
Produce a per-report rolling 1:1 doc from the template, plus the operating rules for the practice: cadence and length settings, the five-part balanced agenda with the check-in marked non-skippable, the question bank, and the follow-up loop (action items reviewed at open, career notes dated monthly).
Do NOT
- Do not let the 1:1 become a status report - that is what standups and written updates are for; status here crowds out everything irreplaceable.
- Do not do most of the talking - target the report leading 70%; a manager monologue teaches the report to stop bringing things.
- Do not cancel without rescheduling, or routinely cut it short - both tell the report they are low priority, and they remember.
- Do not defer career conversations to review season - growth is continuous, and review-time surprises are a management failure.
- Do not run it agenda-less from memory - cold starts waste the first ten minutes and dropped threads erode trust.
- Do not use the 1:1 to deliver a formal review verdict - that is a separate, prepared conversation (performance-review-writer).
Quality bar
- Cadence weekly (or justified biweekly for senior autonomous reports), 30+ minutes, recurring at a fixed time.
- A shared rolling doc exists per report, with both parties adding items between meetings.
- Check-in happens every single session; their topics precede the manager's.
- Career and growth discussed within the last month, with a dated note proving it.
- Every action item has an owner and is reviewed at the next open; the feedback log shows both directions, not just manager-to-report.
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.

