agentleFS
philpalmieriphilpalmieri/engineering-manager-skills/skills/management/peer-prep/SKILL.md

peer-prep

Skill1 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Prepare partnership-oriented 1:1 talking points for a peer, manager, or cross-functional collaborator. Focuses on shared alignment, open commitments, and strategic topics. Use when prepping for a 1:1 with someone you do NOT manage.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈4

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use language that implies a reporting relationship

    line 24
  2. Very specific:

    If the person is in members with "relationship": "direct", redirect to the direct-report-prep skill

    line 43
  3. Distinctive:

    If not found, ask the user about the relationship

    line 44
  4. Distinctive:

    Check active projects for references to this person

    line 60
  5. Distinctive:

    Check for blockers, resource asks, or strategic alignment topics

    line 65
  6. Very specific:

    If the person's relationship is "manager", include upward topics: escalations, resource asks, guidance needs.

    line 99

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Peer / Non-Direct 1:1 Prep

Prepare talking points for a 1:1 with a peer, manager, or cross-functional partner. Focuses on partnership, shared alignment, and open commitments rather than coaching.

When to use

  • "Prep 1:1 with [peer name]", "peer 1:1", "talking points for [name]"
  • As part of the prep-my-day orchestration skill (for non-direct-report 1:1s)

Key difference from direct report prep

This is NOT coaching prep. Do not:

  • Analyze their code or PR quality
  • Frame topics as coaching opportunities
  • Use language that implies a reporting relationship

Instead focus on:

  • Shared project alignment and partnership
  • Open action items between the two of you
  • Strategic discussion topics
  • Things you need FROM this person or want to ALIGN ON

Prerequisites

  • Team roster with the person listed under collaborators
  • A People file for the person in the vault
  • relationship field: "peer" or "manager"

Process

Step 1: Identify the person

  1. Match to team roster collaborators array
  2. If the person is in members with "relationship": "direct", redirect to the direct-report-prep skill
  3. If not found, ask the user about the relationship

Step 2: Gather data

From the vault:

  • Read People/{vault_name}.md for:
    • Open items and recent conversation notes
    • Pending asks or commitments ("they were going to [do X]")
    • Items tagged #followup

From recent dailies (last 5-7 days):

  • Mentions of the person
  • Shared project context
  • Decisions or commitments made

From project files:

  • Check active projects for references to this person
  • Cross-reference with current focus areas for alignment topics

For manager-relationship people:

  • Surface items you may want to escalate or get guidance on
  • Check for blockers, resource asks, or strategic alignment topics

Step 3: Build talking points

Open follow-ups — Commitments either person made. Frame as "did this happen?" not "why didn't you do this?"

Shared project alignment — Active projects you're both involved in. What decisions need to be made? Where might you be misaligned?

Partnership rhythms — Process questions: cadence, async communication, review workflows.

Strategic topics — Bigger-picture items: roadmap, cross-team dynamics, organizational context.

Reflections/feedback season — If it's feedback season, consider whether there are themes to discuss conversationally (but only if the user has flagged this or it's contextually relevant).

Step 4: Write to People file

Same format and rules as direct-report-prep:

#### [[Dailies/YYYY-MM-DD|YYYY-MM-DD]] 1:1

**Topic** (Follow-up)
- Follow up: context about the open item

**Topic** (Alignment)
- Ask: strategic question about shared work

Context types: (Follow-up), (Alignment), (Partnership), (Strategic), (Escalation) (manager only)

Rules

  • Same task/formatting rules as direct-report-prep (no new checkboxes, wikilinks, idempotent)
  • Tone matters. This is a peer conversation. No coaching language, no implied hierarchy.
  • If the person's relationship is "manager", include upward topics: escalations, resource asks, guidance needs.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.