Install
openclaw skills install @mohitagw15856/stakeholder-updateCreate concise executive stakeholder updates using the BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) framework. Use when asked to write a status update, progress report, project communication, or executive briefing for leadership or stakeholders. Produces a BLUF-led update with status, key metrics, risks, upcoming milestones, and decisions needed — readable in under 2 minutes.
openclaw skills install @mohitagw15856/stakeholder-updateThis skill creates effective status updates for executives and stakeholders following the BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) principle.
Ask the user for these if not provided:
Start with the most important information:
Brief overview of accomplishments:
Keep to 3-5 bullet points maximum.
Key Metrics
| Metric | Current | Target | Trend | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Metric name] | [Value] | [Target] | ↑/→/↓ | 🟢/🟡/🔴 |
Include 3-5 most important metrics only.
High Priority Issues:
Only include issues that matter at executive level.
Next 30 Days:
Next 90 Days:
Tone: Professional, concise, action-oriented Length: Keep under 1 page (or 2 minutes reading time) Frequency: Weekly for active projects, bi-weekly for maintenance
Executive Communication Principles:
Lead with conclusions, not process
Focus on impact, not activities
Make problems visible early
Use data to tell story
Make it scannable
🟢 On Track: Meeting all targets, no significant risks 🟡 At Risk: Potential issues that could impact delivery 🔴 Blocked: Critical issues preventing progress, needs intervention
# Product Update: Customer Onboarding Redesign
**Week of Jan 20, 2026**
## BLUF
**Status**: 🟡 At Risk
**Key Takeaway**: New onboarding flow is performing well in tests (+35% completion), but launch delayed one week due to integration issues with billing system.
**Action Needed**: Decision needed on whether to launch onboarding separately or wait for billing integration fix.
## Progress Summary
- Completed user testing with 24 participants (94% positive feedback)
- Implemented first-time user experience improvements
- Resolved 12 of 15 bugs identified in QA
- Engineering allocated resources to billing integration fix
## Key Metrics
| Metric | Current | Target | Trend | Status |
|--------|---------|--------|-------|--------|
| Onboarding Completion | 45% | 60% | → | 🟡 |
| Time to First Value | 4.2 min | 3.0 min | ↓ | 🟢 |
| Setup Support Tickets | 45/week | <30/week | ↓ | 🟢 |
| User Activation Rate | 52% | 65% | → | 🟡 |
## Risks & Blockers
**HIGH: Billing System Integration Delay**
- **Impact**: Prevents users from completing onboarding flow; delays launch by 1-2 weeks
- **Root Cause**: API deprecation by payment processor, requires code rewrite
- **Mitigation**: Engineering team reallocated resources, fix ETA Feb 3
- **Decision Needed**: Launch onboarding without payment integration or wait for fix? (See below)
**MEDIUM: Mobile Testing Coverage**
- **Impact**: Some edge cases on older Android devices not tested
- **Mitigation**: Partnering with QA to expand test matrix; running beta with internal users on diverse devices
## Upcoming Milestones
**Next 30 Days:**
- Resolve billing integration (Feb 3)
- Launch onboarding redesign (Feb 5 or Feb 12 depending on decision)
- Begin measuring impact on conversion (Feb 12)
**Next 90 Days:**
- Iterate based on production data (March)
- Extend to mobile app (April)
- Launch advanced features (May)
## Decision Needed
**Should we launch onboarding separately from billing integration?**
**Option A: Launch Now (Recommended)**
- Pros: Get 35% completion rate improvement to users immediately, gather production data, maintain momentum
- Cons: Users need to complete payment in old flow, slightly disjointed experience
- Timeline: Launch Feb 5
**Option B: Wait for Billing Fix**
- Pros: Fully integrated experience from day one, no technical debt
- Cons: Delays benefits by 2 weeks, Q1 metric targets at risk, team momentum lost
- Timeline: Launch Feb 12
**Recommendation**: Option A. The onboarding improvements are valuable independently, and the old payment flow works fine. Waiting risks missing Q1 targets and delays validated improvements from reaching users.
**Timeline**: Need decision by Jan 22 for Feb 5 launch.
---
**Questions?** Reply to this email or ping me on Slack.
Daily standups:
Weekly updates:
Monthly reviews:
Quarterly business reviews:
Score any output of this skill before handing it over; 32+ is ship-quality.
| Dimension | 0 | 5 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BLUF & status honesty | Status buried or missing; update reads as a diary of activities | Status and takeaway up front, but the emoji flatters the metrics (green outside, red inside) | First three lines give status, one-sentence takeaway, and the ask; the 🟢/🟡/🔴 call matches the worst material metric and says why |
| Metric context | Raw numbers with no targets, trends, or period comparison | Targets present, but metrics are activity counts disconnected from business outcomes | 3–5 metrics, each with target, trend, and status — and the ones that matter are tied to money, customers, or the goal at stake |
| Risk actionability | Risks listed as worries with no owner, mitigation, or impact | Mitigations stated, but impact is unquantified and it's unclear whether the reader needs to do anything | Every risk has quantified impact, a mitigation with a date or success condition, and an explicit "help needed" (or "none") |
| Decision framing | Open-ended questions thrown at executives, or no decisions surfaced at all | Options listed, but without costs/trade-offs or a recommendation | Each decision has 2–3 costed options, a clear recommendation with reasoning, and the date the decision is needed — with what forces that date |
For tool-using agents that can reach the team's communication channels (Slack, email). Sending an update is outward-facing: it is never automatic. Runtimes without tool access ignore this section. See SKILLSPEC.md §5.
schedule-recipe for that, with its own gates), no @-mentions not present in the approved text, no cross-posting.