codexkit-executive-brief-writer
Write one-page executive briefs and decision memos that turn messy inputs into a concise recommendation, options, risks, decision ask, and next steps. Use when leaders need a fast read before approvin
SKILL.mdskills/codexkit-executive-brief-writer/SKILL.md
GitHubExecutive Brief Writer
Purpose
Produce a short, decision-oriented brief that respects executive attention and surfaces the real choice.
When to use
- A leader needs a one-page read before making a call.
- A team must compare options and recommend one path.
- A complex issue needs a short decision memo instead of a long report.
When not to use
- The task is only to summarize text with no recommendation.
- The audience needs a detailed technical appendix instead of an executive brief.
Inputs
- business question or decision to make
- context, evidence, and constraints
- options considered and current recommendation
- known risks, tradeoffs, and deadline
- intended audience and tone
Procedure
- State the decision question in one sentence.
- Distill the situation and why it matters now.
- Compare the real options, including the cost of doing nothing.
- Make one recommendation and support it with evidence.
- Surface the top risks, assumptions, and required decisions.
- End with clear next steps, owners, and timing.
Output
- headline and decision ask
- situation summary
- options with tradeoffs
- recommended path
- key risks and assumptions
- next steps and owners
Definition of done
- The brief can be read in under five minutes.
- A leader can tell what decision is being requested.
- Tradeoffs and risks are explicit, not hidden in narrative.
Examples
- "Write an executive memo for approving a new vendor contract versus building internally."
- "Turn this messy project update into a one-page decision brief for the COO."
Quality Criteria
- All claims reference specific frameworks, standards, or quantifiable data
- Content matches the stated audience's expertise level
- Recommendations are actionable — each includes a concrete next step
- No unsupported assertions or generic filler language
Verification (4C)
| Check | Question |
|---|---|
| Correctness | Do referenced frameworks and standards match their official definitions? |
| Completeness | Are all key concepts covered without significant gaps for the stated audience? |
| Context-fit | Would this be useful for someone new to this domain, or is it too advanced/too basic? |
| Consequence | If a stakeholder acted on this immediately, what could they misinterpret? |
Edge Cases
- Conflicting frameworks — State which framework takes precedence and why. Document the trade-off explicitly.
- Rapidly changing domain — Note information currency date. Flag sections likely to need updates.
- Audience has mixed expertise levels — Provide a glossary and mark advanced sections as optional.
Changelog
- v1.0.0 — Initial release