s4h-communication-clarity-audit

Name: s4h-communication-clarity-audit
Author: human-avatar

205stars23forks

How to install s4h-communication-clarity-audit?

human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-communication-clarity-audit

$npx -y skills add human-avatar/skills-for-humanity --skill s4h-communication-clarity-audit

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Audits a communication for places where the message will be lost, misread, or misunderstood — before it's sent. Triggers: 'clarity audit', 'will this be understood', 'check my message', 'edit for clarity', 'where will this be misread'.

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Communication Clarity Audit
2
3	Most clarity failures are invisible to the sender because the sender knows what they meant.
4	The receiver does not have that context, and the gap between what was meant and what is
5	read is where miscommunication lives. This audit finds that gap by reading the message as
6	the receiver would — without access to the sender's intent.
7
8	---
9
10	## Your Process
11
12	Step 1: Read from the Receiver's Perspective
13	Do not read this as the writer who knows what was meant. Read it as someone receiving it
14	cold. What is actually on the page? This requires a deliberate perspective shift — it is
15	the hardest step and the most important one.
16
17	Framing check: Confirm the specific message, audience, and goal before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual content being audited, who it's addressed to, and what it's trying to achieve — in one sentence, then use `AskUserQuestion`:
18	- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the message, its intended audience, and its goal]. Is that right?"
19	- Header: "Framing"
20	- Options:
21	- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
22	- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
23	- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
24
25	Step 2: Structure Check
26	Can the main point be identified within 10 seconds? If not, the structure is obscuring it.
27	Is the structure serving the reader or the writer's thinking process? The two are often
28	different.
29
30	Step 3: Jargon Inventory
31	List every term or acronym that requires context the reader may not have. Each one is a
32	potential comprehension failure. Include terms that feel obvious — "obvious" is always
33	relative to what the writer knows.
34
35	Step 4: Assumption Inventory
36	What must the reader already know or believe for this message to make sense? State each
37	assumption explicitly. For each: does this reader have this context? If not, the message
38	has a gap.
39
40	Step 5: Ask — Is It Clear?
41	Is there a clear action or next step? Is it clear who does what, by when? A message that
42	informs without directing produces nothing. A message that directs ambiguously produces
43	the wrong thing.
44
45	Step 6: Name the Most Likely Misreading
46	Before narrowing: Show the complete set of misreadings identified across all steps to the user first. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
47	- Question: "I've identified [N] potential misreadings. Before I select the most likely one, are there any you'd flag as especially important, or any I've missed?"
48	- Header: "Prioritise"
49	- Options:
50	- Proceed with your selection — the set looks right
51	- Flag one — user will name a specific misreading to prioritise
52	- Add a missing one — user will describe it
53
54	State the single most plausible way this message will be misread or misunderstood by a
55	reasonable receiver. This is the most valuable output — it is the failure that will
56	actually happen if the message is sent as written.
57
58	---
59
60	## Human Check-in
61
62	Before proceeding, use the `AskUserQuestion` tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
63
64	- Question: "My read: [your 1–2 sentence interpretation]. How do you want to proceed?"
65	- Header: "Scope"
66	- Options:
67	- Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
68	- Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
69	- Breakpoints only — Where this message will be misread or lost, skip what's already clear
70	- Reframe — The read is off; correct it and the analysis will follow the corrected framing
71
72	Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
73
74	## Output Format
75
76	Issues found:
77
78	\| Category \| Issue \| Severity (High/Med/Low) \| Edit \|
79	\|----------\|-------\|------------------------\|------\|
80	\| Structure \| \| \| \|
81	\| Jargon \| \| \| \|
82	\| Assumptions \| \| \| \|
83	\| Ask/Action \| \| \| \|
84
85	Most likely misreading:
86	> [Concrete statement of how a reasonable receiver will misread this — and what they
87	> will do or believe as a result]
88
89	Priority edits:
90	1. [Highest-impact change]
91	2. [Second highest]
92	3. [Third]
93
94	---
95
96	## Notes
97
98	A single clear next step with a named owner and a deadline eliminates more miscommunication
99	than any amount of structural or vocabulary editing. If the ask is ambiguous, fix that
100	before anything else.
101
102	---
103
104	## What's Next
105
106	After delivering this output, use `AskUserQuestion` to offer the next move:
107
108	- Question: "Clarity audited. What's next?"
109	- Header: "Next"
110	- Options:
111	- `/s4h-writing-line-editing` — Fix the clarity issues the audit identifi

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type

s4h-communication-clarity-audit

205stars23forks

View on GitHub

How to install s4h-communication-clarity-audit?

human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-communication-clarity-audit

$npx -y skills add human-avatar/skills-for-humanity --skill s4h-communication-clarity-audit

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Communication Clarity Audit
2
3	Most clarity failures are invisible to the sender because the sender knows what they meant.
4	The receiver does not have that context, and the gap between what was meant and what is
5	read is where miscommunication lives. This audit finds that gap by reading the message as
6	the receiver would — without access to the sender's intent.
7
8	---
9
10	## Your Process
11
12	Step 1: Read from the Receiver's Perspective
13	Do not read this as the writer who knows what was meant. Read it as someone receiving it
14	cold. What is actually on the page? This requires a deliberate perspective shift — it is
15	the hardest step and the most important one.
16
17	Framing check: Confirm the specific message, audience, and goal before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual content being audited, who it's addressed to, and what it's trying to achieve — in one sentence, then use `AskUserQuestion`:
18	- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the message, its intended audience, and its goal]. Is that right?"
19	- Header: "Framing"
20	- Options:
21	- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
22	- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
23	- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
24
25	Step 2: Structure Check
26	Can the main point be identified within 10 seconds? If not, the structure is obscuring it.
27	Is the structure serving the reader or the writer's thinking process? The two are often
28	different.
29
30	Step 3: Jargon Inventory
31	List every term or acronym that requires context the reader may not have. Each one is a
32	potential comprehension failure. Include terms that feel obvious — "obvious" is always
33	relative to what the writer knows.
34
35	Step 4: Assumption Inventory
36	What must the reader already know or believe for this message to make sense? State each
37	assumption explicitly. For each: does this reader have this context? If not, the message
38	has a gap.
39
40	Step 5: Ask — Is It Clear?
41	Is there a clear action or next step? Is it clear who does what, by when? A message that
42	informs without directing produces nothing. A message that directs ambiguously produces
43	the wrong thing.
44
45	Step 6: Name the Most Likely Misreading
46	Before narrowing: Show the complete set of misreadings identified across all steps to the user first. Use `AskUserQuestion`:
47	- Question: "I've identified [N] potential misreadings. Before I select the most likely one, are there any you'd flag as especially important, or any I've missed?"
48	- Header: "Prioritise"
49	- Options:
50	- Proceed with your selection — the set looks right
51	- Flag one — user will name a specific misreading to prioritise
52	- Add a missing one — user will describe it
53
54	State the single most plausible way this message will be misread or misunderstood by a
55	reasonable receiver. This is the most valuable output — it is the failure that will
56	actually happen if the message is sent as written.
57
58	---
59
60	## Human Check-in
61
62	Before proceeding, use the `AskUserQuestion` tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
63
64	- Question: "My read: [your 1–2 sentence interpretation]. How do you want to proceed?"
65	- Header: "Scope"
66	- Options:
67	- Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
68	- Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
69	- Breakpoints only — Where this message will be misread or lost, skip what's already clear
70	- Reframe — The read is off; correct it and the analysis will follow the corrected framing
71
72	Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
73
74	## Output Format
75
76	Issues found:
77
78	\| Category \| Issue \| Severity (High/Med/Low) \| Edit \|
79	\|----------\|-------\|------------------------\|------\|
80	\| Structure \| \| \| \|
81	\| Jargon \| \| \| \|
82	\| Assumptions \| \| \| \|
83	\| Ask/Action \| \| \| \|
84
85	Most likely misreading:
86	> [Concrete statement of how a reasonable receiver will misread this — and what they
87	> will do or believe as a result]
88
89	Priority edits:
90	1. [Highest-impact change]
91	2. [Second highest]
92	3. [Third]
93
94	---
95
96	## Notes
97
98	A single clear next step with a named owner and a deadline eliminates more miscommunication
99	than any amount of structural or vocabulary editing. If the ask is ambiguous, fix that
100	before anything else.
101
102	---
103
104	## What's Next
105
106	After delivering this output, use `AskUserQuestion` to offer the next move:
107
108	- Question: "Clarity audited. What's next?"
109	- Header: "Next"
110	- Options:
111	- `/s4h-writing-line-editing` — Fix the clarity issues the audit identifi

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type