Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Operations leadership for scaling companies. Process design, OKR execution, operational cadence, and scaling playbooks. Use when designing operations, setting up OKRs, building processes, scaling teams, analyzing bottlenecks, planning operational cadence, or when user mentions COO, operations, process improvement, OKRs, scaling, operational efficiency, or execution.
.claude/skills/coo-advisor/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-15 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
Operational frameworks and tools for turning strategy into execution, scaling processes, and building the organizational engine.
COO, chief operating officer, operations, operational excellence, process improvement, OKRs, objectives and key results, scaling, operational efficiency, execution, bottleneck analysis, process design, operational cadence, meeting cadence, org scaling, lean operations, continuous improvement
bashpython scripts/ops_efficiency_analyzer.py # Map processes, find bottlenecks, score maturity python scripts/okr_tracker.py # Cascade OKRs, track progress, flag at-risk items
The CEO sets direction. The COO makes it happen. Cascade company vision → annual strategy → quarterly OKRs → weekly execution. See references/ops_cadence.md for full OKR cascade framework.
Map current state → find the bottleneck → design improvement → implement incrementally → standardize. See references/process_frameworks.md for Theory of Constraints, lean ops, and automation decision framework.
Process Maturity Scale: | Level | Name | Signal | |-------|------|--------| | 1 | Ad hoc | Different every time | | 2 | Defined | Written but not followed | | 3 | Measured | KPIs tracked | | 4 | Managed | Data-driven improvement | | 5 | Optimized | Continuous improvement loops |
Daily standups (15 min, blockers only) → Weekly leadership sync → Monthly business review → Quarterly OKR planning. See references/ops_cadence.md for full templates.
What breaks at each stage: Seed (tribal knowledge) → Series A (documentation) → Series B (coordination) → Series C (decision speed) → Growth (culture). See references/scaling_playbook.md for detailed playbook per stage.
RACI for key decisions. Escalation framework: Team lead → Dept head → COO → CEO based on impact scope.
| Category | Metric | Target | |----------|--------|--------| | Execution | OKR progress (% on track) | > 70% | | Execution | Quarterly goals hit rate | > 80% | | Speed | Decision cycle time | < 48 hours | | Quality | Customer-facing incidents | < 2/month | | Efficiency | Revenue per employee | Track trend | | Efficiency | Burn multiple | < 2x | | People | Regrettable attrition | < 10% |
| When... | COO works with... | To... | |---------|-------------------|-------| | Strategy shifts | CEO | Translate direction into ops plan | | Roadmap changes | CPO + CTO | Assess operational impact | | Revenue targets change | CRO | Adjust capacity planning | | Budget constraints | CFO | Find efficiency gains | | Hiring plans | CHRO | Align headcount with ops needs | | Security incidents | CISO | Coordinate response |
references/scaling_playbook.md — what changes at each growth stagereferences/ops_cadence.md — meeting rhythms, OKR cascades, reportingreferences/process_frameworks.md — lean ops, TOC, automation decisionsSurface these without being asked when you detect them in company context:
| Request | You Produce | |---------|-------------| | "Set up OKRs" | Cascaded OKR framework (company → dept → team) | | "We're scaling fast" | Scaling readiness report with what breaks next | | "Our process is broken" | Process map with bottleneck identified + fix plan | | "How efficient are we?" | Ops efficiency scorecard with maturity ratings | | "Design our meeting cadence" | Full cadence template (daily → quarterly) |
Map processes sequentially. Identify each step, handoff, and decision point. Find the bottleneck using throughput analysis. Propose improvements one step at a time.
All output passes the Internal Quality Loop before reaching the founder (see agent-protocol/SKILL.md).
company-context.md before responding (if it exists)[INVOKE:role|question]| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-14 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +36 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.