Build a quarterly business review from a client folder -- reports, usage exports, support tickets, meeting notes, emails. Extracts delivered value with receipts, surfaces risks before the client does, and drafts the QBR narrative plus expansion asks. For agencies, consultancies, and CS teams.
SkillScore74Maintained
Automatic
◆Customer Success pack
Last verified 8/24/2026
What it changes
Passed 16 of 21 test cases with the skill, and 8 of 21 without it.
Without skill39%
With skill74%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Every listed win cites its specific source artifact.
The QBR lists the four-hour outage under open misses.
The output provides a list of extracted value receipts.
and 8 more in the full report
9 fixed8 passed either way5 still failing1 broke
Pass-rate lift
+35 pp
Tokens
+45%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
+11%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/24/2026v117 of 23 cases passed with skill · 21 comparable
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 8 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 8
Prompt
Review the client interactions in `/docs/acme_q3` where ticket sentiment shows high frustration over slow ticket response times, but meeting attendance remains 100%. What should the engagement health and renewal posture show?
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
The health evaluation notes ticket sentiment frustration as a risk.
Missed
Passed
case-20 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/24/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md28 linessingle file
Cowork QBR Builder
Prepare a QBR the way a top customer-success lead does: prove the value delivered with specifics, name the problems before the client names them, and earn the expansion conversation. Input: a folder of client artifacts for the quarter -- status reports, deliverables, usage/analytics exports, support tickets, meeting notes, email threads -- plus the engagement's stated goals if documented.
Workflow
Reconstruct the quarter. From the folder, build a timeline of what actually happened: deliverables shipped (with dates), meetings held, issues raised and resolved, scope changes. Distinguish documented fact from inference.
Score against goals. Map the quarter's work to the engagement's stated objectives. For each goal: status (achieved/on-track/at-risk/missed), the evidence, and the metric where one exists. If no goals were ever documented, say so -- and propose measurable ones for next quarter, because that gap is itself a finding.
Mine the wins. Extract concrete value receipts: metrics that moved, hours saved, incidents prevented, quotes from the client's own emails ("this saved our launch"). Specific and cited beats impressive and vague.
Face the misses. List what slipped, stalled, or disappointed -- with the honest reason and the fix already in motion. A QBR that hides the miss the client remembers loses the room.
Health and risk read. From ticket sentiment, email response patterns, meeting attendance, and champion activity: engagement health (strong/stable/drifting), risks (champion departure, budget noise, declining usage), and renewal posture.
Draft the QBR. Output qbr-[client]-[quarter].md structured for a deck: executive summary, goals scorecard, wins with receipts, misses with fixes, next-quarter plan, and -- only where the evidence supports it -- 1-2 expansion recommendations framed around the client's goals, not your revenue. Hand to pptx or presentation-design-enhancer for the deck build.
Rules
Every win cites its source artifact. Unsupported claims get cut, not softened.
Report the quarter that happened, not the quarter that was planned. If the folder shows drift, the QBR shows drift.
Client's language over your jargon: pull their vocabulary from their own emails and notes.
Expansion asks must trace to an observed need in the artifacts. No need observed, no ask drafted.
Keep confidential internal material out: internal cost notes, margin discussions, and team-performance comments in the folder never surface in client-facing output.
If the folder is thin (< 5 substantive artifacts), lead with the documentation gap and build what is defensible rather than padding.
Quick Commands
"Build the QBR from [folder]" -- full workflow
"Just the wins" -- step 3, receipts list
"Health check" -- step 5 only
"What should next quarter's goals be?" -- proposed measurable objectives from the evidence