Install
openclaw skills install skills-sh:mbfinotti/sales-skills/sales-meeting-recapMeeting Recap Convert the user's call notes into two artifacts: a recap email the buyer will ratify by replying, and mutual close plan items when the deal is complex enough to warrant a shared plan. The organizing rule is Armand Farrokh's (30MPC): a recap email answers exactly…
openclaw skills install skills-sh:mbfinotti/sales-skills/sales-meeting-recapConvert the user's call notes into two artifacts: a recap email the buyer will ratify by replying, and mutual close plan items when the deal is complex enough to warrant a shared plan. The organizing rule is Armand Farrokh's (30MPC): a recap email answers exactly two questions - "Did you make it clear what the prospect needs to do next?" and "Did you remind them why they agreed to take action?" Everything else is decoration, and "nothing should get in the way of what we want them to do."
Second rule: the recap is champion-enablement content. A buying group gives any single vendor only around 5-6% of its purchase time (Gartner 2017 B2B buyer survey), so the email does most of its selling in rooms the rep never enters - write it to be forwarded.
Scope boundaries:
mbfinotti/sales-skills@sales-call-review.Ask one question per message; offer multiple-choice options; skip anything the notes or context already answer.
Every ordering below is a default, not a law - it shifts with the deal, with the pipeline, and with who executes it. Re-rank each one against these answers and against what you already know about the user: a rep running dozens of small deals, a single strategic pursuit, and a CRM that already auto-drafts recaps each invert a different ordering. Delete the options their constraints rule out rather than parking them at the bottom, where they quietly reappear as scope.
The load-bearing guard. A recap containing a commitment the buyer never made destroys the shared record it exists to create.
30MPC's 3-step recap email (Armand Farrokh):
One phone screen is the whole budget, so these elements compete for it. Ranked by value per rep minute, best ratio first:
The ratio starves the send list: it is the only row costing real minutes per deal, so a minutes ceiling cuts it first. Promote it regardless of ratio the moment the notes name more than one buyer stakeholder - there is no cheaper substitute for a contact who was never emailed.
Deleted, not demoted. Keep these out of the draft entirely, since they lose on every axis:
Unranked on purpose, because they cost nothing and apply to every recap:
When to send. value: within hours of the call > later the same day > next morning > multi-day. Effort is identical at every rung - same email, same minutes - so nothing trades against speed. Send before the buyer's internal debrief, always (timing norm).
Filled strong and negative examples: references/recap-email-examples.md.
Three rungs answer "how much plan does this deal need". Ranked by value per rep minute, best ratio first:
The efficiency order starves the full plan: it is the most expensive rung per deal and loses every ratio round, yet it is the only thing that holds a complex deal together. Promote it regardless of ratio when a buying committee, a multi-call cycle, or procurement or security review sits in the path - roughly $50K+ ACV (threshold reasoning: the multithreading payoff is measured on $50K+ deals). Below that line, delete rungs 2 and 3 from the output rather than offering them: a plan left on the menu for a single-decision-maker deal comes back as scope the rep never had minutes for.
Column layout, milestone taxonomy, the Salesforce 5-part structure, and co-ownership tactics: references/mutual-close-plan.md.
Identical in both, explicitly:
Consumer-sales follow-up practice (real estate, med spas, automotive, gyms, financial advisory) converges independently on the same two disciplines this skill applies to B2B: reply within about two hours of the call, and personalize to what the buyer actually said rather than a generic template - the same-day timing and buyer's-own-words rules above are not a B2B convention stretched onto B2C, they hold natively in both.
Four recap weights, listed lightest to heaviest. The ranking is the pair of efficiency lines below, not this list order - which weight wins per rep minute inverts with who is executing:
Default weight:
Reserve the human recap for deals worth the minutes - in high-velocity motions it is often replaced by automated lifecycle sequences entirely (carve-out for transactional sales).
SUBJECT : under 50 characters, next-step-anchored
RECAP EMAIL : plain text; next steps first (Owner - Deliverable - Date,
buyer items highlighted), pain in the buyer's own words,
attachments named, closing ratification question
CLOSE PLAN : chosen rung, plus new or updated milestones (milestone |
buyer owner | seller owner | date) at rung 2 or 3
OPEN GAPS : missing owners/dates, unconfirmed commitments marked
"proposed - confirm before sending", questions for the user
SEND LIST : who receives the email and why (multithreading check)
Pass threshold: every check, no exceptions. Redraft and re-check until nothing fails. Deliberately unranked: these are pass/fail gates, not options traded against each other, so ordering them would only imply the cheap ones are skippable.
Instrument in this order - value per unit of setup effort, best ratio first:
The order starves sales-cycle length - a quarter of waiting kills its ratio every round. Promote it anyway when the question is whether to roll recap discipline out across a team; nothing cheaper produces that evidence. And never measure close-plan success by vendor win-rate uplift claims: instrument your own before/after comparison.
Rows are defect-and-fix pairs, not competing options - each fix is the only fix, so there is nothing to rank.
| Failure | Fix |
|---|---|
| "Circle back next week" as a next step | Owner + Date + Deliverable, or list it under Open gaps |
| Every action owned by the seller | Surface buyer-owned steps from the notes; flag the imbalance if none exist |
| Feature dump instead of the buyer's pain | Their problem, their words, verbatim |
| No calendar invite for the next meeting | Real date plus invite, or flag and prescribe the 5 Minute Drill |
| Recap sent to one contact on a committee deal | Build the send list; single-threading is the top structural failure |
| Commitments the buyer never made | Anti-fabrication rule; mark "proposed - confirm before sending" |
| Full close plan dumped on an unconsulted buyer | 2-3 agreed milestones, then a working session and sign-off |
| Recap sent the next morning | Same day, within hours, before their internal debrief |
| Markdown formatting in the email body | Plain text only |
| A recap the length of meeting minutes | One phone screen; minutes are a different artifact |
mbfinotti/sales-skills@meddpicc-scorecard - qualifies the deal; this skill's close plan operationalizes its Decision Process and Paper Process elements.mbfinotti/sales-skills@deal-champion-mapping - identifies who the recap should be written through and who belongs on the send list.mbfinotti/sales-skills@deal-red-flags - a missing dated next step or a seller-only plan surfaced here is an input signal there.mbfinotti/sales-skills@deal-value-calc - builds the forwardable business case; the recap carries its numbers into the buyer's internal debrief.1ef68881b2ed