goals
Skill1 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
OKRs and contribution goals — writing, cascading, scoring, and individual goal setting. Use when: setting team OKRs, writing individual contribution goals, cascading company OKRs to team level, coaching someone on goal quality, preparing for OKR reviews, scoring OKRs at end of cycle, or linking contribution goals to team OKRs. Covers both team-level OKRs and individual contribution goal frameworks.
12 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- matteotitta/repo-structure-agencytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- codewhale-hq/codewhale-plugin-marketplacetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- 0xUrsanomics/utopia-ostheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- kriscard/Skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 28, 2026
- jaredhhawk/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- matteotitta/claude-marketing-contexttheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use test, research and 1 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
Microsoft AzureSkilltest
Also in 3 projects that use this
NVIDIASkillresearch
Before designing a feature, research how comparable libraries solve the problem, check best practices, known pitfalls, and upstream changes. Use when starting a new feature, investigating an unfamiliar area, or the user asks to research something.
Also in 4 projects that use this
Hugging FaceSkillimplement
Make tests pass. Invoke after /write-tests produces failing tests.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions12 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 12
- alxyrgin/health-os★ 38same name
- dfrysinger/qrspi-plus★ 37same name
- sneakers-the-rat/muse-skills★ 24same name
- obra/muse-skills★ 20same name
- kriscard/Skills★ 15same name
- jacobwell/muse-skills★ 8same name
- codewhale-hq/codewhale-plugin-marketplace★ 5same name
- matteotitta/claude-marketing-context★ 3same name
- 0xUrsanomics/utopia-os★ 2same name
- matteotitta/repo-structure-agency★ 1same name
2 more not listed
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 repository42 other files it gives its agents.
- accessibility-testingSkill
- alternatives-analysisSkill
- anomaly-detectionSkill
- api-designSkill
- async-messagingSkill
- caching-strategiesSkill
- chartsSkill
- cicdSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- commsSkill
- critical-feedbackSkill
- data-analysisSkill
- databaseSkill
- data-migrationsSkill
- data-visualizationSkill
- dependency-managementSkill
- dockerSkill
- error-handlingSkill
- feature-flagsSkill
- git-workflowSkill
- ide-setupSkill
- large-changeSkill
- logging-metricsSkill
- markdown-docsSkill
- mcp-serverSkill
- meeting-agendasSkill
- okrsSkill
- presentationsSkill
- product-managementSkill
- prompt-writingSkill
- pythonSkill
- reclassificationSkill
- release-managementSkill
- retrospectivesSkill
- roadmap-planningSkill
- securitySkill
- stakeholder-commsSkill
- statisticsSkill
- status-updatesSkill
- testingSkill
- ticket-writingSkill
- typescriptSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 11 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
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 88
Not everything cascades — 1 locally-important OKR per quarter is fine
- Distinctive: line 99
Before submitting a goal, apply this test:
- Distinctive: line 103
If reasonable people could disagree about whether the goal was met, it's too vague.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 11 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Goals — OKRs and Contribution Goals
When to Use
- Setting team OKRs at the start of a quarter
- Writing individual contribution goals
- Cascading company OKRs to team and individual level
- Coaching a team member on goal quality
- Preparing for mid-cycle or end-of-cycle reviews
- Scoring OKRs or assessing contribution goal attainment
Two Goal Systems, One Framework
| System | Scope | Where It Lives | Audience |
| Team OKRs | Team-level outcomes for the quarter | Planning docs, shared trackers | Team, PM, leadership |
| Contribution Goals | Individual's commitments for the cycle | Goal-tracking system (e.g., Workday, Lattice, 15Five) | Employee, manager, HR |
Both follow the same quality bar: specific, measurable, outcome-oriented, and time-bound. Contribution goals should cascade from team OKRs — they are an individual's slice of the team's commitments.
Team OKRs
Objectives
An objective is what the team wants to achieve:
- Qualitative and directional — a destination, not a number
- One sentence, no jargon
- Scoped to the quarter
- Within the team's influence
Good: "Establish our platform as the most reliable in the industry" Bad: "Improve uptime SLA metrics by optimizing infrastructure monitoring and alerting"
Key Results
A key result is how you measure progress:
- Quantitative — a number, percentage, or binary deliverable
- Has a baseline ("from X") and a target ("to Y")
- Measures outcomes, not activities
- 70% completion is healthy; 100% means you aimed too low
Good: "Reduce P1 incident count from 8/quarter to 2/quarter" Bad: "Implement better monitoring" (activity, not outcome)
Structure
Objective: <What we want to achieve>
KR1: <Metric from X to Y>
KR2: <Metric from X to Y>
KR3: <Binary: Ship X by date>Aim for 2–4 objectives with 2–5 key results each per team per quarter.
Cascading
Company OKR
└─ Org OKR (how this org contributes)
└─ Team OKR (how this team contributes)
└─ Contribution Goal (how this person contributes)Rules:
- Align, don't duplicate — your team OKR contributes to the org OKR, not repeats it
- Own your scope — within the team's control
- Not everything cascades — 1 locally-important OKR per quarter is fine
- Individual goals connect to team OKRs but are personalized
Contribution Goals
Contribution goals are entered into your goal-tracking system by the employee. They should read like individual OKRs — specific to that person's involvement in team priorities.
The Unambiguity Test
Before submitting a goal, apply this test:
If ten people read your goal and independently assessed whether you achieved it, would they all reach the same conclusion?
If reasonable people could disagree about whether the goal was met, it's too vague. Sharpen it.
The Differentiation Test
If you might have a similar goal last quarter or next quarter, what makes THIS quarter different?
Goals should reflect the specific context, deliverables, and impact of the current cycle. "Improve code quality" is evergreen and therefore useless. "Reduce escaped defects in the payments service from 12/quarter to 3/quarter" is anchored to now.
Goal Categories
| Category | % of Goals | Examples |
| Delivery / Business Impact | 50–60% | Ship feature X, improve metric Y by Z% |
| Technical / Craft | 20–30% | Reduce tech debt in service A, establish testing practices |
| Growth / Development | 10–20% | Lead a project end-to-end, mentor a junior engineer |
| Team / Culture | 0–10% | Improve onboarding docs, drive hiring for a role |
Writing Quality: What Good Looks Like
Each goal needs:
- What: Specific deliverable or measurable outcome
- How you'll know: Quantified success criteria
- Why it matters: Connection to team OKR or business priority
- When: Target date or quarter
Template
## Goal: [Title]
### Description
[What will be done and why it matters — 1-2 sentences]
### Success Criteria
- [ ] [Specific, measurable outcome — passes the unambiguity test]
- [ ] [Specific, measurable outcome]
### Alignment
Supports: [Team OKR or business priority]
### Target
[Quarter or specific date]Examples by Level
Mid-level Engineer:
- "Deliver the payments integration end-to-end, handling 10K transactions/day by end of Q2. Success: integration live in production, processing real transactions, with <0.1% error rate."
- "Reduce flaky test rate in CI from 15% to <2% by mid-quarter. Success: 2-week rolling flaky rate below 2%."
Senior Engineer:
- "Design and ship multi-tenant data isolation. Success: architecture doc approved, implementation deployed, zero cross-tenant data leaks in pen testing."
- "Establish observability best practices for the team. Success: every service has dashboards, alerting, and a runbook. MTTR reduced from 45min to 15min."
Staff Engineer:
- "Define technical strategy for event-driven architecture migration. Success: strategy doc approved by architecture review, migration plan with milestones published, first service migrated."
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Problem | Fix |
| "Improve reliability" | Not measurable — improve how much? | "Reduce P1 incidents from 8 to 2 per quarter" |
| "Work on the migration" | Activity, not outcome | "Complete phase 1 migration: 3 services on new platform by Q2" |
| "Be a better mentor" | Vague, fails unambiguity test | "Mentor [Name] through their first feature lead; they ship independently by end of quarter" |
| "Support the team" | Evergreen, no differentiation | "Drive adoption of contract testing; 80% of inter-service calls covered by Q2" |
| Same goal every quarter | Fails differentiation test | Anchor to THIS quarter's specific deliverables |
OKR Quality Checklist
| Check | ✓ |
| Objective is qualitative and directional | |
| Objective fits in one sentence | |
| Each KR has a baseline ("from X") and target ("to Y") | |
| KRs measure outcomes, not activities | |
| KRs are within the team's control | |
| 2–5 KRs per objective | |
| 2–4 objectives per team | |
| At least one KR is a stretch |
Contribution Goal Checklist
| Check | ✓ |
| Passes the unambiguity test (10 assessors agree) | |
| Passes the differentiation test (specific to this quarter) | |
| Has quantified success criteria | |
| Aligned to a team OKR or stated business priority | |
| Has a target date | |
| Tracked in goal-tracking system |
Scoring
Team OKR Scoring (end of quarter)
| Score | Meaning |
| 0.0–0.3 | Failed to make meaningful progress |
| 0.4–0.6 | Made progress but fell short |
| 0.7–0.9 | Hit or came close — the sweet spot |
| 1.0 | Fully achieved (if all KRs score 1.0, you aimed too low) |
Scoring Process
- Self-score each KR with evidence
- Team review — discuss and calibrate
- Document lessons learned
- Feed forward into next cycle's planning
Contribution Goal Assessment
Assessed during performance review cycles:
| Rating | Criteria |
| Exceeded | Delivered beyond the stated success criteria |
| Met | Achieved what was committed |
| Partially Met | Made progress but fell short on key criteria |
| Not Met | Significant gaps |
Cadence
| When | Activity |
| Quarter start (Week 1–2) | Draft team OKRs; employees write contribution goals |
| Monthly | Check-in: update KR progress, flag risks |
| Mid-quarter | Formal mid-cycle review — on track? Goal adjustments? |
| Quarter end | Score team OKRs, assess contribution goals, feed into next cycle |
Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern | Fix |
| Task masquerading as KR | Measure the outcome, not the activity |
| Sandbagging | At least one KR should be a genuine stretch |
| No baseline | Always include current state: "from X to Y" |
| Set and forget | Monthly check-ins at minimum |
| Contribution goals copied from OKRs | Personalize: what is THIS person's specific slice? |
| Goals too vague to measure | Apply the unambiguity and differentiation tests |
Related Skills
- planning — Quarterly planning process that generates team OKRs
- performance-cycles — Review cycles, calibration, where goals get assessed
- delivery — Sprint execution against goal-aligned work
- seasonal-events — Annual HR calendar and goal-setting timeline
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.

