---
name: mohitagw15856/relationship-check-in
source: https://app.decimal.ai/s/mohitagw15856-relationship-check-in@1/SKILL.md
source_sha256: 029086c80c69
---

# Relationship Check-In

Most relationship problems aren't sudden — they're small unspoken things that pile up. A regular, low-drama check-in surfaces them early, in a format that feels like teamwork rather than a confrontation. This gives you a simple structure, ground rules that keep it safe, and prompts that get past "we're fine" to what's actually going on.

## What This Skill Produces

- **A check-in structure** — appreciations first, then what's working, what needs attention, and each person's needs/asks
- **Ground rules** — how to keep it safe: no blame, no scorekeeping, listen to understand, one topic at a time
- **Surfacing prompts** — questions that get past "everything's fine" to the real stuff (connection, stress, intimacy, division of labor, future)
- **A cadence** — how often to do it (regular and short beats rare and heavy) and a low-key setting
- **A bigger-issue flag** — when something surfaced needs more than a check-in (recurring conflict, trust, or a counselor)

## Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:
- **The prompt** — proactive habit, or something specific feeling off
- **Where you're at** — generally good, some tension, or a rough patch
- **What's on your mind** — anything you want the check-in to make space for
- **Both temperaments** — is your partner open to this, or conflict-avoidant
- **History** — do you already talk openly, or is this new territory

## Framework: Safe, Structured, Regular

1. **Open with appreciation.** Start by naming what you value and what's going well — it sets a collaborative, non-threatening tone.
2. **Set safety ground rules.** No blame or scorekeeping, listen to understand not to rebut, one issue at a time, and take breaks if it heats up.
3. **Move through the structure.** What's working → what needs attention → each person's needs and specific asks. Structure prevents it becoming a vague gripe session.
4. **Use prompts to go deeper.** Gentle questions surface connection, stress, intimacy, chores/fairness, and future — past the reflexive "we're fine."
5. **Keep it regular and light.** A short check-in often (weekly/monthly) catches things early far better than a rare, loaded Big Talk.
6. **Know when it's bigger.** If the same issue keeps recurring, or trust/serious conflict surfaces, name that a check-in isn't enough — consider a counselor.

## Output Format

### Relationship check-in: [proactive / something's off]

**Ground rules:** no blame/scorekeeping · listen to understand · one topic · pause if heated.

**The structure**
1. **Appreciations:** [what we each value / what's going well].
2. **What's working:** […].
3. **What needs attention:** [gently, one at a time].
4. **Needs & asks:** [each person's specific request].

**Prompts to go deeper:** [connection · stress · intimacy · fairness/chores · future].
**Cadence:** [regular + short] in a [low-key setting].
**Bigger than a check-in?** [recurring issue / trust / serious conflict → consider a counselor].

## Quality Checks
- [ ] Opens with appreciation to set a safe tone
- [ ] Includes ground rules against blame/scorekeeping
- [ ] Follows a structure (working → attention → needs/asks)
- [ ] Provides prompts that get past "we're fine"
- [ ] Recommends a regular, light cadence
- [ ] Flags when an issue needs more than a check-in

## Anti-Patterns
- **A grievance dump** disguised as a check-in.
- **Scorekeeping and blame** that make it unsafe.
- **Only doing it in crisis** — rare, loaded Big Talks.
- **Staying at "we're fine"** with no deeper prompts.
- **Treating a serious issue** (trust, recurring conflict) as check-in material.

## Example Trigger Phrases
- "How do my partner and I do a relationship check-in?"
- "We need to talk about us but I don't want it to become a fight."
- "Set up a regular way to check in on our relationship."
- "Questions to ask my partner about how we're doing."
- "Something feels off with us — how do I bring it up calmly?"