find-key-internal-sources

# Find Key Internal Sources Find the smallest reliable internal route that helps a seller get an answer or unblock work: the right people, maintained docs, public channels, decision forums, and escalation paths. The default output is a quick, evidence-backed routing map plus a draft-ready first ask. This workflow is read-only and never posts, assigns, or updates systems. ## Common Skill Instructions MANDATORY: If not already in context, read and adhere closely to plugins/sales/skills/index/SKILL.md## Cross-Skill Best Practices. ## Key Dependency Categories Use only the categories needed for the selected route; do not fan out across every source by default. - ~~Knowledge & Files for maintained source-of-truth pages, owner metadata, wikis, field guides, playbooks, FAQs, runbooks, launch docs, and decision records - ~~Internal Messaging for public channels, channel topics, threads, active contributors, escalation routes, support channels, and decision forums - ~~CRM for customer or account identity, ownership, opportunity context, and CRM-visible blockers that clarify an account-specific question Prefer canonical ownership and source-of-truth material over chat mentions. ~~CRM can resolve account truth, but it does not by itself prove who owns the internal answer. ## Reference Loading `SKILL.md` owns the normal route selection, bounded search, ranking, and output map. Load references only when their extra detail matters: - Use [references/search-patterns.md](references/search-patterns.md) when query fan-out, compound facets, source-specific search, or stopping rules need more detail. - Use [references/company-context.md](references/company-context.md) only after the generic pass, when user-provided or connector-visible terminology is likely to change the route. ## Terms - **Source-of-truth page:** the maintained doc, wiki, tracker, or page that should be treated as the most authoritative answer source. - **DRI:** directly responsible individual, the person accountable for a topic, decision, or follow-through. - **SME:** subject matter expert, someone with practical depth on the topic even if they are not the accountable owner. - **Decision forum:** the recurring meeting, channel, doc, or group where tradeoffs and approvals are handled. ## Workflow Guidance ### 1. Resolve the topic and route - Require a concrete topic_or_task: customer question, product topic, objection, implementation issue, account blocker, initiative, or source-of-truth gap. - Infer it from the active thread or provided Sales output when clear. If still ambiguous, make a bounded candidate pass of at most three source reads, then ask one friendly question with up to five concrete candidates. - Treat ambiguous company-like names as possible account anchors. Use a bounded ~~CRM lookup when available before relying on internal docs or messages for account-specific routing. - Default to quick. Use deep only when requested or when a high-stakes question clearly needs broader corroboration. Choose the smallest answer route that satisfies the request: - owner_route — who owns, approves, knows, or should be contacted - doc_route — what to read, which page is maintained, or what wording is approved - channel_route — where to ask, discuss, escalate, or get support - full_map — experts, docs, and channels together when the request actually needs all three ### 2. Search canonical sources first - For owner_route, start with maintained ownership, directory, routing, or source-of-truth pages; use messages to confirm current practice or fill gaps. - For doc_route, start with maintained docs, title/heading matches, linked hubs, owner fields, and recency; fetch only the strongest candidate before ranking. - For channel_route, start with public channel names, topics, purposes, and documented escalation routes; inspect recent public threads only when they change confidence. - Use ~~CRM first for account identity and deal context when the route is customer-specific, then use ~~Knowledge & Files or ~~Internal Messaging for internal ownership. - In quick, make one canonical source attempt, one narrow fallback when the first pass is empty, thin, or misleading, and at most one fetch or thread read per top candidate. - Broaden only when the first pass is weak, the topic spans distinct surfaces, or the user asked for deep. Stop when a supported route is good enough, results stabilize, or additional searching produces low-confidence duplicates. ### 3. Build useful search facets - Start with exact topic terms, then add aliases, abbreviations, legacy/current names, product/team names, and task-shape terms such as owner, approval, policy, runbook, playbook, FAQ, support, or escalation. - For a compound question, keep separate tracks for the product/account surface and the control/process surface. Do not let a strong policy hit replace product routing, or a launch page replace approval ownership. - Use [references/search-patterns.md](references/search-patterns.md) when query fan-out, source-specific search, or stopping rules need more detail. - Use company-specific terminology only when it comes from the user or connector-visible source truth. Do not invent internal names, channel patterns, URLs, or ownership conventions. - Apply organization-specific expansions only after generic candidate retrieval, keep base scoring primary, and cap the total context-based boost per candidate at `+0.25`. ### 4. Pull, score, and rank candidates Normalize candidates by type, title or name, URL, source, evidence, ownership signal, and freshness. Deduplicate near-identical entries. Rank by: 1. direct relevance to the requested answer route 2. authority and maintenance signal 3. freshness 4. cross-source confirmation 5. practical usefulness for the seller's next action - Prefer direct evidence links over profile-only or mention-only matches. - Prefer maintained source-of-truth pages, field guides, FAQs, and playbooks over one-off notes. - Prefer channels whose topic, purpose, linked guide, or recent threads show an ownership path over channels that merely mention the topic. - For people inferred mainly from ~~Internal Messaging, require a recent ownership or expertise signal, defaulting to the last 90 days; omit or down-rank stale candidates. - Exclude deactivated or inactive users. Default to public channels only; include private channels, group DMs, direct messages, or externally shared channels only when the user explicitly asks and access is appropriate. - Keep distinct routes when a topic spans product/GTM guidance and policy, security, implementation, pricing, or approval ownership. ### 5. Render the routing map - Return only the depth the request needs. For a single route, keep the other required sections compact with Not searched in quick pass or No high-confidence candidate found. - Explain each candidate's answer-path type: DRI, approver, SME, maintainer, accountable team, decision forum, launch owner, escalation channel, support channel, or feedback channel. - Include a one-line rationale, direct link when available, evidence signal, and freshness or confidence when it affects trust. - If the user's wording conflates two surfaces, add a short framing note explaining the split and continue with both routes unless the distinction changes which sources are safe to use. - Recommended First Ask must be a concrete draft the seller can send to the best owner or public channel. Draft it in chat; do not post it. - Coverage Gaps must name unavailable or weak categories, the effect on confidence, and the smallest useful next step. ### Next Step Options After the first output, offer the most relevant follow-up from the options below. Offer one clear transition, not a menu. Suggest ONLY these unless you are very confident another option is more useful: - Draft the first ask to the recommended owner, expert, or public channel. - Open and synthesize the strongest source-of-truth document for the seller's question. - Prepare a concise escalation note when the supported route requires escalation. - Create a reusable routing note with the verified people, docs, channels, and caveats. - Find the smallest missing source that would resolve an ownership or approval gap. Next steps to avoid: - Posting, assigning, escalating, or updating ownership automatically. ## Modes - quick — default; up to three candidates each for experts, docs, and channels, with bounded retrieval - deep — five to eight candidates each when evidence quality supports them - owner_route, doc_route, channel_route, full_map — answer-shape routes; combine with quick or deep ## Output Format ```md # Internal Routing Map: [Topic] [Optional framing note when the topic spans distinct ownership surfaces.] ## Experts - **[Name / team]** — [DRI / approver / SME / other type]; [why this route]. [Evidence link] · [confidence/freshness] ## Docs - **[Doc]** — [source-of-truth / field guide / FAQ / other type]; [why it matters]. [Link] · [confidence/freshness] ## Channels - **[#channel]** — [support / escalation / decision forum / other type]; [why ask here]. [Link] · [confidence/freshness] ## Recommended First Ask > [Draft-ready question or handoff, addressed to the best owner or public channel.] ## Coverage Gaps - [Missing or weak source, confidence impact, and smallest useful next step] --- {Follow the instructions and output format/conditions in [Limitations and Improvements](../index/SKILL.md#limitations-and-improvements)} {Follow the instructions and output format/conditions in [Next Steps](../index/SKILL.md#4-next-steps)} ``` ## Example Prompts - `Find the key internal sources for a customer question.` - `Find who owns the Enterprise SSO rollout path for ExampleCorp.` - `Find the docs and channels for answering a customer's security review question.` - `Route this implementation blocker to the right internal people and source of truth.` ## Rules - Do not fabricate owners, experts, channels, documents, source-of-truth paths, links, or ownership certainty. - Keep facts and inference separate; label uncertain ownership Likely or Possible. - Keep the routing-map phase read-only. Do not post, send, assign, or update anything. - Prefer fewer high-confidence routes over long noisy lists. - Always cite sources with hyperlinks when useful links are available; say (no useful link available) when the absence matters.