メニュー
Audits a communication for places where the message will be lost, misread, or misunderstood — before it's sent. Triggers: 'clarity audit', 'will this be understood', 'check my message', 'edit for clarity', 'where will this be misread'.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Master orchestration skill. Takes any situation in plain English, identifies the underlying goal, designs a multi-skill reasoning workflow, and executes it sequentially — feeding each skill's output into the next. Use when you say 'help me think through this', 'I need to figure out what to do', 'where do I start', or any time you want structured thinking applied end-to-end rather than routed to a single tool.
Tests whether the parts of something form a unified whole — finding the jarring inconsistencies that accumulate when different contributors work without a shared vision. TRIGGERS: 'coherence check', 'does this feel unified', 'something feels off', 'inconsistent', 'check the whole', 'does this hang together'.
Tests whether a solution is more complex than it needs to be — distinguishing necessary complexity from accidental complexity that accreted over time. TRIGGERS: 'elegance test', 'is this too complex', 'over-engineered', 'is there a simpler way', 'does this feel right'.
Identifies the underlying formal pattern at work — because most successful designs, arguments, and solutions share deep structural patterns, and naming the pattern unlocks the playbook. TRIGGERS: 'what pattern is this', 'pattern recognition', 'why does this work', 'identify the form', 'what structure is at play', 'what archetype is this'.
Finds the simpler version while preserving what matters — not arbitrary reduction, but finding the core and discarding what is not it. TRIGGERS: 'find the simple version', 'simplify this', 'what's the essence', 'less but better', 'strip it back', 'what could we remove'.
Entry point for the aesthetic toolkit. Routes to the right aesthetic skill based on your situation. Use when you say 'aesthetic', 'check the design', 'does this feel right', 'is this elegant', 'is this too complex', 'what pattern is this', 'find the simpler version', or want an aesthetic lens applied without knowing which specific tool fits.
| name | s4h-communication-clarity-audit |
| description | Audits a communication for places where the message will be lost, misread, or misunderstood — before it's sent. Triggers: 'clarity audit', 'will this be understood', 'check my message', 'edit for clarity', 'where will this be misread'. |
Most clarity failures are invisible to the sender because the sender knows what they meant. The receiver does not have that context, and the gap between what was meant and what is read is where miscommunication lives. This audit finds that gap by reading the message as the receiver would — without access to the sender's intent.
Step 1: Read from the Receiver's Perspective Do not read this as the writer who knows what was meant. Read it as someone receiving it cold. What is actually on the page? This requires a deliberate perspective shift — it is the hardest step and the most important one.
Framing check: Confirm the specific message, audience, and goal before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual content being audited, who it's addressed to, and what it's trying to achieve — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
Step 2: Structure Check Can the main point be identified within 10 seconds? If not, the structure is obscuring it. Is the structure serving the reader or the writer's thinking process? The two are often different.
Step 3: Jargon Inventory List every term or acronym that requires context the reader may not have. Each one is a potential comprehension failure. Include terms that feel obvious — "obvious" is always relative to what the writer knows.
Step 4: Assumption Inventory What must the reader already know or believe for this message to make sense? State each assumption explicitly. For each: does this reader have this context? If not, the message has a gap.
Step 5: Ask — Is It Clear? Is there a clear action or next step? Is it clear who does what, by when? A message that informs without directing produces nothing. A message that directs ambiguously produces the wrong thing.
Step 6: Name the Most Likely Misreading
Before narrowing: Show the complete set of misreadings identified across all steps to the user first. Use AskUserQuestion:
State the single most plausible way this message will be misread or misunderstood by a reasonable receiver. This is the most valuable output — it is the failure that will actually happen if the message is sent as written.
Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool. State your interpretation of the situation in 1–2 sentences — what is being analyzed and what the core question is — then ask:
Proceed based on their selection. If the user reframes, incorporate the correction before running any analysis.
Issues found:
| Category | Issue | Severity (High/Med/Low) | Edit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Structure | |||
| Jargon | |||
| Assumptions | |||
| Ask/Action |
Most likely misreading:
[Concrete statement of how a reasonable receiver will misread this — and what they will do or believe as a result]
Priority edits:
A single clear next step with a named owner and a deadline eliminates more miscommunication than any amount of structural or vocabulary editing. If the ask is ambiguous, fix that before anything else.
After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:
/s4h-writing-line-editing — Fix the clarity issues the audit identified/s4h-communication-objection-mapping — Address the objections hiding behind confusing points/s4h-writing-restructure — Restructure if the clarity issues are structural