Produces a plain-language stakeholder summary from an existing feature specification, for sharing with non-technical stakeholders before implementation kicks off.
NewMaintained
Automatic
◆Product Management pack
Last verified 9/26/2026
What it changes
2 of 22 test cases passed with the skill.
Pass-rate lift
—
Tokens
+236%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-56%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 9/26/2026v22 of 22 cases passed with skill · 2 comparable
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
Lift withheld: 2 comparable cases; this report requires 8.
See it in action
One of 2 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 2
Prompt
In the stakeholder summary generation process, when running Pass A, Pass B, and Pass C self-checks, can you evaluate the document directly from memory after applying fixes?
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Each self-check pass reloads the output file content from disk using the Read tool.
Missed
Passed
case-16 · gemini-3.6-flash · 9/26/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md312 lines2 files
Project Context
CLAUDE.md: !find . -maxdepth 1 -name "CLAUDE.md" -type f
project-discovery.md: !find . -maxdepth 3 -name "project-discovery.md" -type f
personal config directory: !bash "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/han-config-dir.sh" 2>/dev/null || echo "$HOME/.claude"
As your first action, use the Read tool on .han/config.md inside the personal config directory path above. A read
that returns no file is no personal configuration: continue silently. When that file or the project .han/config.md
probe supplies content, apply it per config-rule.md, which governs precedence
between the two files, relative-path resolution, and what to do with a file that reads but cannot be used.
Operating Principles
Plain language only. The stakeholder summary never contains file paths, line numbers, function or class names,
library mechanics, database tables, API shapes, or language primitives. Use product-level subsystem names ("the
telematics provider", "the customer list"), user-facing UI vocabulary (badge, popup, list), and behavioral verbs
(create, edit, update, claim, merge, sync). A non-technical stakeholder must be able to read the document end-to-end
without translation.
Center the customer, not the system. Lead with the problem the customer experiences, then the capabilities
introduced, then the experience, then the data flow, then what is out of scope, then the questions. The system is the
means, not the subject.
High level only. A stakeholder summary is for getting feedback before kickoff. Skip anything that would only
matter once implementation has started: schemas, sequencing, file boundaries, test plans, rollout strategy, telemetry.
If a detail is only meaningful to engineers, it does not belong in this document.
Diagrams carry weight. Use Mermaid for both the user experience flow and the data flow before-and-after. Diagrams
are not decoration — they replace paragraphs of prose, so they must be readable on their own.
Open questions are stakeholder-shaped. The closing questions are framed in customer or product language, not
engineering language. They ask stakeholders to confirm framing, scope, and trade-offs — not to make technical
decisions.
Apply the shared readability standard. As it writes and refines the summary, the skill sources the standard by
invoking han-communication:readability-guidance and applies it, holding the named audience: the non-technical
stakeholder. The plain-language rules above are this skill's domain-specific supplement to the shared standard, not a
replacement for it. The standard's dedicated han-communication:readability-editor rewrite pass (Step 5) is this
skill's readability rewrite; it and the standardized self-check (Step 6, Pass B) take the place of the freehand
plain-language rewrite this skill used to run, so the summary gets one readability review, not two. The standard
governs how the summary reads, never whether a required fact from the spec survives.