Development Story Report
When to Use
Use this skill when the user wants a concise story of completed work rather than another implementation pass.
Good fits
- "wrap this up"
- "what did we find?"
- "summarize what changed"
- "give me a handoff note"
Bad fits
- open-ended brainstorming
- fresh implementation planning
- long-form documentation authoring
Surface Notes
- Conversation evidence comes first.
- Local or workspace evidence is optional support, not mandatory scope.
- Keep the final report short enough to scan quickly.
Overview
This skill creates a short story report for completed work. The report is written for a non-technical decision-maker by default, so it should explain what changed, why it matters, what remains open, and what should happen next with minimal jargon.
Use this reporting stance
- Lead with the answer, not the chronology.
- Prefer grouped outcomes over a play-by-play narrative.
- Use conversation context first.
- Use local or workspace evidence only when it materially improves accuracy.
- Mirror the user's language when it is clear which language they are using.
Default output
- Format: inline Markdown
- Length: about 300-500 words
- Audience: non-technical decision-maker
- Tone: clear, direct, calm
- Evidence style: brief cues only, such as "based on tests run" or "from the workspace changes"
Workflow
- Confirm the task is a wrap-up request.
- Trigger on explicit asks for a report, recap, handoff, summary, development story, or brief.
- Also trigger on strong completion cues such as "wrap this up", "we're done", or "what did we find?"
- Gather evidence.
- Start with the current conversation.
- Pull in local files, diffs, plans, notes, or outputs only when available and helpful.
- Ask one short gap-check question only if a critical fact is missing.
- Do not start a long interview.
- Derive the governing thought.
- What changed?
- Why does it matter?
- What should the reader conclude?
- Group the support into 2-4 same-kind outcome buckets.
- Good buckets: decisions, outcomes, findings, achievements, implications, unresolved issues.
- Bad buckets: random chronology, mixed evidence types, implementation trivia.
- Draft the report using the template below.
- Run the quality gates before sending the final answer.
Evidence hierarchy
Use evidence in this order:
- Direct statements from the current conversation
- Verified local or workspace artifacts
- Narrow inferences that are clearly supported by the first two
State uncertainty briefly when evidence is incomplete.
Pyramid Quality Gates
Check the draft against these rules before finalizing:
- The first sentence must summarize the whole report.
- Each support group must contain the same kind of idea.
- The groups must be ordered logically, not arbitrarily.
- Every summary line must express an implication, not a vague category label.
- The report must reduce reader effort.
- Remove unnecessary implementation detail.
- Replace jargon with plain language when possible.
- Open issues must be included when they materially affect risk, confidence, or next actions.
- Evidence cues must stay lightweight.
- Mention support briefly.
- Do not turn the report into an appendix unless the user asks.
Anti-patterns
- Do not narrate the work minute by minute.
- Do not hide unresolved issues to make the report sound cleaner.
- Do not produce a changelog disguised as a summary.
- Do not bury the conclusion under setup.
Report Template
Use this structure by default:
# [Short title]
## Bottom line
[One sentence that states what was achieved or learned and why it matters.]
## Key outcomes
[Two to four short paragraphs or bullets grouped by outcome, decision, or implication.]
## Open issues
[Brief note on risks, blockers, unknowns, or unverified assumptions.]
## Next step
[One concrete next action.]
Writing rules
- Keep the whole report in the 300-500 word range unless the user asks for a different depth.
- If there are no material open issues, say so briefly instead of inventing one.
- When the user clearly wrote in another language, produce the report in that language.
- Use plain language that a busy non-technical reader can understand on the first pass.
Example Prompts
The skill should trigger for prompts like these:
- "Wrap this up for leadership."
- "Summarize what we found and what remains unresolved."
- "Give me a short handoff note from this work."
- "What did we achieve here, in plain English?"
- "Create a development story report from this session."
The skill should usually not trigger for prompts like these:
- "Write a PRD from scratch."
- "Turn this into a tutorial."
- "Draft meeting minutes."
- "Create a long technical postmortem."
Example framing
Good framing:
- Bottom line: "We clarified the approach, proved the build path, and reduced execution risk for the next implementation phase."
- Outcome group: "The main design choice was to keep Pyramid Principle logic inside the report skill rather than depending on a second skill, which keeps routing simpler and more portable."
Weak framing:
- "First we talked about the idea, then we looked at references, then we discussed options, then we asked some questions."