メニュー
Runs a structured team health assessment across key dimensions. Use when asked to run a team health check, assess team morale, facilitate a retrospective on ways of working, or evaluate team dynamics. Produces a health assessment with RAG status per dimension, underlying signals, and prioritised improvement actions with named owners.
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Apply prioritisation frameworks (RICE, MoSCoW, Kano, ICE, Opportunity Scoring) to rank features and backlog items. Use when asked to prioritise features, rank a backlog, decide what to build next, or evaluate tradeoffs between competing ideas. Produces a scored, ranked feature list with framework-specific tables, recommended build order, deprioritised items, and assumptions made.
Generate structured developer handoff annotations for a Figma screen or component. Use when asked to write Figma annotations, create dev handoff notes, document a Figma design for developers, or write specs for a screen. Produces a complete annotation set covering interactions, states, spacing, accessibility, and edge cases.
Audit a Figma component library for consistency, coverage gaps, and naming issues. Use when asked to audit components, review a design system, check component consistency, identify missing components, or assess Figma library health. Produces a structured audit report with issues prioritised by impact, naming recommendations, and a fix plan.
Write a structured design brief for a Figma design task from a product requirement or feature request. Use when asked to write a design brief, create a design spec for Figma, turn a PRD into design requirements, or brief a designer on what to build in Figma. Produces a brief with goals, scope, user flows, components needed, constraints, and success criteria.
Runs a PM-perspective design critique focused on product outcomes and user goals, not aesthetics. Use when asked for a PM design critique, a product review of a Figma design, or feedback from a product perspective without needing to be a designer. Produces structured outcome-based feedback tied to user goals, business metrics, and requirement coverage.
Runs a pre-handoff QA checklist on a Figma design before it goes to engineering. Use when asked to QA a Figma design, do a pre-handoff check, or validate a Figma file is ready to build. Produces a structured QA report covering file hygiene, component usage, accessibility, and handoff readiness with explicit pass/fail status per item. Optimised for Opus 4.7 and newer models.
| name | team-health-check |
| description | Runs a structured team health assessment across key dimensions. Use when asked to run a team health check, assess team morale, facilitate a retrospective on ways of working, or evaluate team dynamics. Produces a health assessment with RAG status per dimension, underlying signals, and prioritised improvement actions with named owners. |
This skill produces a structured team health assessment inspired by Spotify's health check model and extended with engineering, product, and cross-functional team dimensions. Output can be used as a facilitation guide for a live session or as an async survey-and-report format.
Ask the user for these if not provided:
Date: [Date] Facilitated by: [Name or role] Team size: [X people] Format: [Live session (60 min) / Async survey + report] Cycle: [One-off / Quarterly / Monthly]
Use this guide to run the session in 60 minutes.
| Time | Activity | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| 0–5 min | Framing and ground rules | Facilitator |
| 5–40 min | Card voting — 7 dimensions, 5 min each | Full team |
| 40–50 min | Top 3 themes discussion | Full team |
| 50–58 min | Actions and owners | Team lead |
| 58–60 min | Close and next date | Facilitator |
For each dimension, each team member votes with one of three cards:
After voting, the team discusses: what drove the votes? What would make this Green?
Are we shipping things that matter, at the pace we should?
| Indicator | Probes for discussion |
|---|---|
| We ship work that creates real value for our users | How do we know our output is valuable? When did we last talk to a user? |
| Our pace of delivery feels healthy and sustainable | Are we consistently shipping? Or do we have long dry spells? |
| We have clarity on what "done" looks like | Do we have a shared definition of ready and done? |
| We celebrate shipping, not just building | Do we acknowledge completed work, or does it just disappear into the backlog? |
Current vote: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴
Key themes from discussion:
What would make this Green?
Is releasing software (or our work) smooth and low-risk?
| Indicator | Probes for discussion |
|---|---|
| We can release whenever we choose, without anxiety | What does a release feel like? Smooth or stressful? |
| Our deployment process is automated and reliable | How much manual work does a release involve? |
| We have confidence in our test coverage | Do we catch bugs before users do? |
| Rollback is fast and rehearsed | Have we ever rolled back? How long did it take? |
Current vote: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴
Key themes from discussion:
What would make this Green?
Do people enjoy working here and with each other?
| Indicator | Probes for discussion |
|---|---|
| People generally enjoy coming to work | If you had to describe the team energy in one word, what would it be? |
| We celebrate successes as a team | When did we last properly celebrate something? |
| Interpersonal dynamics are healthy — no drama or cliques | Are there any relationships that are strained or avoided? |
| We laugh and have non-work conversations | Do we know each other as people, not just colleagues? |
Current vote: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴
Key themes from discussion:
What would make this Green?
Can people speak up, take risks, and make mistakes without fear?
| Indicator | Probes for discussion |
|---|---|
| People raise concerns without worrying about the consequences | When did someone last raise a concern publicly? What happened? |
| Mistakes are treated as learning opportunities, not blame events | Think of the last mistake on the team. How was it handled? |
| People challenge each other's ideas in a constructive way | Do we have real debates, or do we agree in the room and disagree in the corridor? |
| Everyone's voice feels equally heard regardless of seniority | Do the same people always speak first and longest? |
Current vote: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴
Key themes from discussion:
What would make this Green?
Do we learn fast and adjust quickly?
| Indicator | Probes for discussion |
|---|---|
| We get feedback on our work quickly (from users, data, tests) | How long after shipping do we know if something worked? |
| Our planning and retrospective cycles help us improve | Do retros lead to real change, or do the same issues come back? |
| We cut work that isn't working, even when it's hard | Can you name something we've stopped doing because it wasn't working? |
| Our meetings and processes don't slow us down | Which meetings do people dread? Which do they find valuable? |
Current vote: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴
Key themes from discussion:
What would make this Green?
Do we understand why our work matters?
| Indicator | Probes for discussion |
|---|---|
| Everyone on the team can articulate why their work matters | Could each person on this team explain to a stranger why their work is important? |
| The team's goals are clear and shared | Can everyone name the team's top 3 priorities right now? |
| Our work connects to the wider company direction | Do we understand how we fit into the bigger picture? |
| We're proud of what this team builds | If you described your team's work to someone you respect, would you feel good about it? |
Current vote: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴
Key themes from discussion:
What would make this Green?
Do we work well together and support each other?
| Indicator | Probes for discussion |
|---|---|
| People actively help each other when someone is stuck | Think of the last time someone was blocked — what happened? |
| Knowledge is shared openly — no information silos | Is there any knowledge that only one person holds? What's the risk? |
| Cross-team collaboration is smooth and low-friction | Which team is hardest to collaborate with and why? |
| People feel supported when they're struggling | Is there psychological safety to say "I'm struggling with this"? |
Current vote: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴
Key themes from discussion:
What would make this Green?
Use this template to document results after the session or survey.
| Dimension | Score | Status | Trend vs last quarter |
|---|---|---|---|
| Delivering Value | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [↑ / → / ↓] |
| Easy to Release | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [...] |
| Fun & Morale | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [...] |
| Psychological Safety | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [...] |
| Speed & Feedback Loops | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [...] |
| Mission & Purpose | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [...] |
| Collaboration & Support | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [...] |
| Overall | [X/5] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [↑ / → / ↓] |
What's working well (keep doing):
What needs attention (most important to fix):
| Action | Owner | Due date | Success indicator |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Specific action — e.g. Introduce pairing Fridays for knowledge sharing] | [Team lead / individual] | [Date] | [How will we know it worked?] |
| [...] | [...] | [...] | [...] |
Next health check: [Date — recommended 6–8 weeks for teams with active improvement actions, 13 weeks for steady-state teams]
