Write Review Packet (Manager Mode)

Generate evidence-based performance review content for a specific direct report.

Manager Mode Only

This skill requires manager mode. Verify with: work-chronicler workspace profile

If not in manager mode, run work-chronicler init --mode manager first.

Workspace

Active profile: !work-chronicler workspace profile Manager root: !work-chronicler workspace root

For non-Claude tools: Run work-chronicler workspace root to get your manager profile path.

User Input

Required:

•
Report ID: The kebab-case report identifier (e.g., "alice-smith")
- •See available reports: work-chronicler reports list

Optional:

•Review period: The time range to focus on (e.g., "Q4 2025", "2025 annual review")
•Review template/questions: If your company provides specific prompts to answer
•Focus areas: Specific themes or projects to emphasize

Example invocations:

•/work-chronicler-mgmt-write-review-packet alice-smith Q4-2025
•/work-chronicler-mgmt-write-review-packet bob-jones 2025-annual, here are the review questions: [paste questions]

If the user provides a specific review template or questions, prioritize answering those over the default structure below.

Data Location

Manager mode data structure:

code

<manager-root>/
└── reports/
    └── <report-id>/
        ├── work-log/
        │   ├── pull-requests/
        │   │   └── <org>/<repo>/*.md
        │   └── jira/
        │       └── <org>/<project>/*.md
        ├── analysis/
        │   ├── stats.json         # Impact breakdown, repo stats
        │   ├── projects.json      # Detected project groupings
        │   └── timeline.json      # Chronological view
        ├── performance-reviews/   # IMPORTANT: Past reviews for format/context
        ├── peer-reviews/          # IMPORTANT: Peer feedback for collaboration insights
        ├── notes/                 # IMPORTANT: Manager notes about goals, focus areas
        └── outputs/               # Generated documents

Instructions

•
Validate report ID:
- •Confirm report exists in manager config
- •Use exact report ID provided by user
- •If invalid, show available reports via work-chronicler reports list
•
Read supporting documents first (critical for context):
- •performance-reviews/ - Match format, tone, and understand what's valued
- •peer-reviews/ - Collaboration effectiveness, how report is perceived by colleagues
- •notes/ - Manager's notes about goals, focus areas, and themes to emphasize
- •These provide essential context for consistent, well-informed reviews
•
Read analysis files:
- •stats.json - Overall impact distribution, repo stats
- •projects.json - Major project groupings (focus on high confidence)
- •timeline.json - Activity trends, busiest periods
•
Focus on flagship and major impact work:
- •These represent the most significant contributions
- •Cross-reference with ticket summaries for business context
- •Group related work into narrative themes
•
Structure for performance review:
- •Accomplishments: What was delivered, with quantifiable impact
- •Impact: How it helped the team, product, or business
- •Growth: Skills developed, challenges overcome
- •Collaboration: Cross-team work, mentorship, knowledge sharing (reference peer reviews)
- •Goals: How work aligned with or exceeded goals (reference notes)

Output Location

Save generated documents to:

code

<manager-root>/reports/<report-id>/outputs/review-packet-YYYY-MM-DD.md

Use the exact report ID (e.g., alice-smith) in the path.

Output Format

Structure depends on company format (from past reviews). If no past reviews exist, use this structure:

markdown

## Performance Review: [Report Name] - [Review Period]

### Summary
[2-3 sentence overview of key accomplishments and impact]

### Key Accomplishments

#### [Project/Theme 1]
**What they did**: [Description of work]
**Impact**: [Measurable outcomes, business value]
**Evidence**: [PR/ticket citations]

#### [Project/Theme 2]
**What they did**: [Description of work]
**Impact**: [Measurable outcomes, business value]
**Evidence**: [PR/ticket citations]

### Technical Growth
- [Skills developed or deepened]
- [New technologies or practices adopted]
- [Technical challenges overcome]

### Collaboration & Leadership
- [Cross-team initiatives]
- [Mentorship or knowledge sharing]
- [Process improvements]
- [Peer feedback themes]

### Alignment with Goals
[How work aligned with or exceeded stated goals from manager notes]

### Areas for Growth
[Development opportunities, stretch areas for next period]

### Looking Ahead
[Future focus areas, upcoming challenges]

Important Constraints

Per roadmap requirements:

•✅ Evidence-based summaries only
•❌ No rankings
•❌ No scoring
•❌ No comparisons with other team members

Focus on the individual's contributions, growth, and impact with specific evidence.

Tips

•Match the tone and format of previous performance reviews if available
•Use specific numbers and metrics when possible
•Connect technical work to business outcomes
•Highlight work that demonstrates growth from previous feedback
•Be specific about THIS PERSON's contribution vs team work
•Include both planned work and unplanned wins (incidents handled, etc.)
•Reference peer reviews for collaboration effectiveness
•Use manager notes to emphasize goal alignment
•Reference the timeline for seasonal patterns (launches, migrations, etc.)