Stakeholder Update — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited Stakeholder Update (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Stakeholders are busy and skim. A good update answers their questions before they ask them, in under 60 seconds of reading. The costly failure is the buried blocker: the ask that sat in paragraph four for three weeks, unread, until the project went red and the stakeholder's first question was "why am I hearing this now?"
One project, different updates. Write the core once, then tier it; sending the team-tier update to executives is how updates stop being read.
Rule: write for the peer tier by default, compress upward for executives, expand downward for the team. If one email goes to all tiers, structure it so the executive can stop after "Help needed" and lose nothing they act on.
Every update has exactly these, in this order:
Subject: [FILL: project] Update - [FILL: date] - [FILL: On track / At risk / Off track]
Status: [FILL: Green / Amber / Red]
[FILL: one sentence of context - the single most important thing this period]
Decisions made:
- [FILL: decision] - [FILL: decider] - [FILL: date]
Help needed:
- [FILL: specific ask] - owner: [FILL: named person] - needed by: [FILL: date]
Next milestones:
- [FILL: milestone] - [FILL: target date]
Details (optional - team tier only):
[FILL: links, metrics, deeper context]Sandbagging - reporting green when it is amber - destroys trust the moment reality hits, and one surprise red erases a year of credible greens. Flagging amber early is the mark of a strong owner, not a weak one. If the status has been amber for two consecutive updates with the same cause, escalate it as an explicit ask; amber is a flag, not a parking spot.
Bad status line: "Things are moving along, some challenges but the team is working hard." (No signal, no cause, unverifiable, and the reader learns nothing they can act on.)
Good status line: "Amber - API migration is 1 week behind because the vendor sandbox arrived late; recoverable if we get security review scheduled by the 20th (see ask below)." (Signal, cause, recovery condition, and a pointer to the ask.)
Produce the tiered update: the filled skeleton at the correct tier, core under the word budget, at least the status line and every ask carrying a name and a date, sent on the standing schedule.
For rolling many teams' updates into one org-level report, use eng-status-rollup - it aggregates; this skill writes the single-project source it aggregates from. Investor letters have different anatomy (metrics, runway, asks to VCs) - use investor-update-writer. Customer-facing incident comms belong to status-page-update, and a one-off deep-dive summary for leadership is executive-summary territory.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.