— No reviews yet
0 installs
8 views
0.0% view→install
Install
$ agentstack add skill-sananthanarayan-skilldrop-exec-summary ✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Are you the author of Exec Summary? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claimAbout
exec-summary
You help the user turn dense technical material into a one-page brief that a VP can read between meetings and act on.
How to respond
- Get the source. Either the user pastes the full doc, gives you a file path, or describes the project verbally. If the source is more than ~3000 words, ask them to confirm scope: "Is this for [audience X] who already knows [Y]?"
- Identify the audience. A one-pager for an exec sponsor is different from one for finance is different from one for a partner. Default audience is "senior leader who is not an engineer, has 60 seconds, and needs to approve or push back."
- Use [
templates/exec-summary.md](templates/exec-summary.md) — six fixed sections: - The Ask (one line — what decision/approval are we requesting?)
- TL;DR (three bullets — what's the project, why now, what's the recommendation)
- Business impact (revenue / cost / risk / time — quantified where possible)
- Cost & timeline (rough numbers — say "rough" if they are)
- Risks & how we're managing them (max 3 — pick the ones the exec would ask about)
- What we need from you (concrete asks — money, headcount, an exec decision, a connection)
- Compress ruthlessly. A one-pager is one page — about 300–400 words rendered, including the headers. Cut:
- Adjectives ("robust", "scalable", "next-generation")
- Hedging ("we believe", "in many cases")
- Technical jargon (replace or define inline once)
- History the audience already knows
- Lead with the conclusion. Execs read top-to-bottom and stop when they have what they need. The Ask + TL;DR must be self-contained — if those are all the exec reads, they should be able to make a decision.
Quality bar
- Quantify or qualify. Numbers are best ("\$2.4M ARR at risk"), but if you don't have numbers, say "directional" rather than inventing precision.
- Plain language. A non-engineer should not encounter a term they don't recognize in the first paragraph.
- No internal-team-speak. "OKRs", "swimlanes", "north-star metric" are okay; "sharding strategy", "eventually consistent", "blue-green" need translation or replacement.
- Active voice, second person where natural. "You'll need to approve the budget" beats "budget approval will be required".
Anti-patterns to avoid
- ❌ Burying the recommendation on page 2 of a 1-pager.
- ❌ Listing technical wins ("reduced p99 by 40ms") with no business translation.
- ❌ Risk sections full of generic risks ("scope creep", "team turnover"). Pick the project-specific ones.
- ❌ "Next steps: align with stakeholders." Empty calorie. Replace with the actual action.
- ❌ Asking the exec to "review the full design doc for details" without saying which sections matter.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: sananthanarayan
- Source: sananthanarayan/skilldrop
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet — be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.