mohitagw15856/team-health-check
plugins/pm-people/skills/team-health-check/SKILL.md
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.
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills team-health-checkInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Jun 9, 2026, 7:37 AM105.7s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- 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.
Team Health Check Skill
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.
Required Inputs
Ask the user for these if not provided:
- Team name and function (engineering squad, product team, sales pod, etc.)
- Team size and composition (how many people, what roles)
- Format — facilitated live session or async survey + report?
- Context — why are you running this now? (new team / ongoing ritual / post-incident / low morale signal)
- Any known issues — anything the facilitator knows going in that will colour the results?
Output Structure
Team Health Check: [Team Name]
Date: [Date] Facilitated by: [Name or role] Team size: [X people] Format: [Live session (60 min) / Async survey + report] Cycle: [One-off / Quarterly / Monthly]
Part 1: Facilitation Guide (Live Session)
Use this guide to run the session in 60 minutes.
Session structure
| 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 |
Ground rules (read at start)
- This is not a performance review — there are no wrong answers
- We're assessing the team, not individuals — speak about "we" not "they"
- What's said here stays here — results shared as aggregated themes, not attributed to individuals
- The goal is one or two actionable improvements, not a long list
Voting mechanic
For each dimension, each team member votes with one of three cards:
- 🟢 Green — working well, we're proud of this
- 🟡 Amber — some things work, but there are issues worth discussing
- 🔴 Red — we have a real problem here that's slowing us down
After voting, the team discusses: what drove the votes? What would make this Green?
Part 2: Health Dimensions
Dimension 1: Delivering Value
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?
Dimension 2: Easy to Release
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?
Dimension 3: Fun & Morale
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?
Dimension 4: Psychological Safety
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?
Dimension 5: Speed & Feedback Loops
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?
Dimension 6: Mission & Purpose
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?
Dimension 7: Collaboration & Support
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?
Part 3: Health Summary & Report
Use this template to document results after the session or survey.
RAG Summary Dashboard
| 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] | 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 | [↑ / → / ↓] |
Top Themes
What's working well (keep doing):
- [...]
- [...]
What needs attention (most important to fix):
- [Most pressing issue — specific, with evidence from the session]
- [Second issue]
- [Third issue — if applicable]
Action Plan
| 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]
Quality Checks
- [ ] Session ground rules established psychological safety before voting started
- [ ] Each dimension had open discussion, not just a vote
- [ ] Actions are specific enough to be verifiably done — no vague commitments like "improve communication"
- [ ] Each action has a single owner — not "the team"
- [ ] Results are shared with the team, not kept by management
- [ ] Trend data is tracked across cycles to show improvement or regression
Anti-Patterns
- [ ] Do not run a health check without first establishing psychological safety — without it, scores reflect fear, not reality
- [ ] Do not treat a single health check as a trend — one data point cannot show improvement or regression
- [ ] Do not keep results with management without sharing them with the team — transparency is a prerequisite for trust
- [ ] Do not generate action items that are vague commitments like "improve communication" — every action must be specific and verifiable
- [ ] Do not assign actions to "the team" — each improvement action needs a single named owner
Example Trigger Phrases
- "Run a team health check for my engineering squad"
- "Facilitate a team health assessment — we've had some morale issues"
- "Build a team health check survey for my product team"
- "Generate a Spotify-style health check for our cross-functional pod"
- "Create a quarterly team health check template"
Related Skills
mohitagw15856/competitor-signal-tracker
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Analyse competitor moves and translate them into strategic implications for your product roadmap. Use when a competitor announces a new feature, pricing change, partnership, or strategic shift, or when producing a periodic competitive intelligence report. Produces a categorised signal analysis with reactive-vs-proactive assessment, threat ratings, specific roadmap implications, and recommended responses with owners.
951SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 21, 2026
mohitagw15856/community-management-playbook
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Build a community management playbook for a brand's social media channels. Use when asked to create guidelines for managing comments, DMs, and community interactions, define a moderation policy, or build response frameworks for social media community managers. Produces a complete playbook with response templates, escalation paths, moderation rules, and tone guidelines.
946SKILL.mdUpdated May 28, 2026
mohitagw15856/claude-superpowers
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Activate a 4-stage coding discipline framework that forces Claude to plan before coding, isolate changes on a branch, write tests first, and self-review output twice before presenting it. Use when starting a complex coding task, when past Claude sessions produced broken first drafts, or when you want to prevent rework cycles. Produces a confirmed written plan, isolated feature branch, test-first implementation, and a double-reviewed output with a correctness and code-quality checklist.
946SKILL.mdUpdated May 28, 2026
mohitagw15856/aeo-optimizer
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Optimize an article for Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) — restructuring content so AI engines like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude can extract, quote, and cite it. Rewrites headings as questions, drops 50-80 word answer capsules, audits paragraph length, and flags trust signals. Use when asked to AEO-optimize, make content AI-readable, improve AI citation chances, or adapt an article for answer engines.
946SKILL.mdUpdated May 28, 2026