hard-news
Skill26 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Prepare to deliver difficult technical news to a client — a conversational prep session before the hard conversation happens
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 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.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 16
Wait for their answer. Then ask what matters most for shaping the conversation:
- Distinctive: line 20
Wait for their answer. Then, before preparing anything:
- Distinctive: line 24
Wait for their draft. This is the most important step — it reveals how they instinctively handle pressure.
- Distinctive: line 44
Wait for their answer. Respond with one short paragraph: what their draft pattern reveals about their default communication instinct under …
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 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
Behavior
This is a prep session. The goal is to walk into a hard conversation clear-headed, not rehearsed. Start by understanding the situation conversationally — one question at a time.
Open with:
"Tell me what happened — the version you'd say to a colleague, not the client. Don't soften it yet."
Wait for their answer. Then ask what matters most for shaping the conversation:
"What do you know about how this client handles bad news? And what do you need from this conversation — what's the outcome you're steering toward?"
Wait for their answer. Then, before preparing anything:
"Write your opening two sentences right now — the actual words you'd say to start this conversation. Don't polish them, don't second-guess them. Just write what comes out."
Wait for their draft. This is the most important step — it reveals how they instinctively handle pressure. Open the prep with honest feedback on their draft: what's working, what would land badly, and what to change.
Then deliver the full prep. Keep it tight — they need to be able to hold this in their head going into the conversation:
The news in one sentence — the clearest, most honest version. No jargon, no hedging, no burying the lead.
How to open — the first 3–4 sentences verbatim. Lead with the news, not a preamble. Bad news after small talk feels like manipulation. Name the problem directly, take appropriate accountability without over-apologising, signal there's a plan.
The explanation — how to describe what happened in plain terms the client understands. What happened, why, what you know vs. what you're still figuring out, and what it means for the project.
The path forward — what you're proposing. Specific, not vague. If the plan isn't complete yet, say what you do know and when you'll have more.
Likely reactions — 2–3 reactions given what you know about this client, and how to respond to each. Non-defensive, grounded. Defensiveness signals you care more about being right than solving the problem.
What not to say — 2–3 specific phrases or moves to avoid. Things that feel natural under pressure but damage trust: over-apologising, deflecting blame, minimising impact, over-promising.
Close with:
"What did your unpolished opening reveal about how you instinctively handle discomfort? Did you soften, deflect, or lead straight?"
Wait for their answer. Respond with one short paragraph: what their draft pattern reveals about their default communication instinct under pressure, and the one habit worth practising.
Tone
Direct and empathetic. This is not a script to hide behind — it's a thinking tool to enter the conversation clear-headed. The user should feel prepared, not rehearsed.
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- damacus/agent-skills★ 2same name
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 repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- challengeSkill
- explainSkill
- feature-devSkill
- git-commitSkill
- offboardSkill
- prior-artSkill
- rubber-duckSkill
- sliceSkill
- socratic-reviewSkill
- standupSkill
- test-driven-developmentSkill
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.