菜单
MUST BE USED when analyzing meeting transcripts or notes. Classifies input type, attributes speakers, and verifies names against colleagues.json. Works with routing-brains and summarizing-meetings skills for complete workflow.
| name | analyzing-meetings |
| description | MUST BE USED when analyzing meeting transcripts or notes. Classifies input type, attributes speakers, and verifies names against colleagues.json. Works with routing-brains and summarizing-meetings skills for complete workflow. |
Analyze meeting input to prepare it for routing and summarization:
input/org/colleagues.jsonFor product-specific context, see CLAUDE.local.md.
Role: Programme Manager / Chief of Staff with exceptional attention to detail
Experience: 10+ years supporting senior leadership, skilled at distilling complex discussions into actionable content.
Mindset:
| Input Type | Characteristics | Processing Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Raw Transcript | Speaker labels, timestamps, disfluencies, "um/uh" | Clean, segment by speaker turns |
| Meeting Notes | Bullet points, headers, structured sections | Parse structure, extract by section |
| Hybrid | Mix of verbatim quotes and summarized points | Apply both parsers, merge results |
Raw Transcript indicators:
[John]:, Speaker 1:, John Smith:[00:15:32], (15:32)--Meeting Notes indicators:
#, ##, ###-, *, •[ ], TODO:, Action:| Label Type | Examples | Attribution Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Explicit labels | [John]:, Speaker 1: | Use directly |
| Partial labels | J:, timestamps only | Infer with medium confidence |
| No labels | Continuous text | Apply inference heuristics |
Positional Inference:
Contextual Clues:
| Clue Type | Example | Inference |
|---|---|---|
| Role statement | "As the PM..." | Speaker is a PM |
| Self-reference | "My team will handle..." | Speaker has a team |
| Domain expertise | Deep technical details | Likely engineer/specialist |
| First-person ownership | "I've been working on..." | Speaker owns that work |
Conversation Flow:
| Level | Score | Criteria | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| High | 0.8+ | Explicit name, clear role statement | Attribute directly |
| Medium | 0.5-0.8 | Strong contextual clues | Attribute with [Inferred] tag |
| Low | < 0.5 | Ambiguous clues | Ask user |
High confidence:
**[Name]**: "We should prioritize the API work for Q2"
Medium confidence:
**[Inferred: Engineering Lead]**: "The technical debt is blocking new features"
- *Attribution basis*: Speaker discussed technical architecture
Low confidence:
I couldn't determine who said this:
**Quote**: "We need to push back the launch date"
Who made this statement?
a) [Name 1] b) [Name 2] c) Someone else d) Unknown
MUST attribute (ask if uncertain):
Transcription services often misspell names. Use input/org/colleagues.json to verify.
Check a name against colleagues.json when:
1. Extract all names mentioned
2. For each name:
a. Check exact match in colleagues.json → Use as-is
b. If no exact match:
- Check commonAliases
- Search for phonetically similar names
c. If match found with high confidence → Auto-correct
d. If uncertain → Flag for user verification
For detailed name lookup protocols, see .claude/reference/name-verification.md.
[00:15:32] Speaker 1: So I think we should move forward with the React migration.
[00:15:45] Speaker 2: I agree, but we need to consider the timeline. My team is already stretched.
[00:16:02] Speaker 1: Can you give me a realistic estimate?
## Input Classification
**Type**: Raw Transcript
**Speaker Labels**: Partial (numbered speakers, timestamps)
**Duration**: ~1 minute segment
## Speaker Attribution
- **Speaker 1** [Inferred: PM/Lead]: Sets agenda, asks for estimates
- **Speaker 2** [Inferred: Engineering Lead]: References "my team", timeline concerns
## Names Verified
- No names mentioned directly in this segment
- "Speaker 2" likely engineering based on team reference
## Ready for Routing
- 1 potential decision: React migration
- 1 action item: Timeline estimate needed
- Attribution: Ask user to confirm speaker identities
A framework for evaluating whether a product's success is mathematically possible based on its cost structure, acquisition assumptions, and unit economics. Use this when vetting a new job opportunity, evaluating a startup's viability, or determining if a failing product can be "iterated" to success.
A structured method for gathering high-signal, contextual feedback from a trusted network to validate ideas or navigate complex career decisions. Use this when facing a "fork in the road" career choice, prioritizing product features, or narrowing down topics for public speaking or content.
Create and maintain individual colleague communication profiles in Markdown. Use when the user wants to document a person's communication style, tone preferences, decision style, sensitivities, channels, response cadence, or examples of good vs bad communication, and store it as a per-person profile under input/org/profiles/.
Gather context through high-leverage eigenquestions when information is missing or ambiguous. ACTIVATE THIS SKILL when: (1) context is missing or unclear, (2) user asks something requiring unstated assumptions, (3) working within a brain without recent context, (4) starting new work or strategic decisions, (5) multiple valid approaches exist without clear direction, (6) user says "clarify", "help me think through", or "what should I consider". This skill asks ONE discriminating question at a time to unlock maximum downstream clarity.
Drafts concise, professional PM emails using the CRAFT method. Use when user needs to compose, draft, write, or rewrite professional email communication including follow-ups, status updates, escalations, and stakeholder messages.
Converts Markdown files to professional PDF documents using WeasyPrint. Use when user wants to convert markdown to PDF, export as PDF, or generate PDF from documents. Supports custom CSS styling, page headers/footers, and Autodesk brand themes.