Persuasive writing for executive audiences — value propositions, calls to action, cost-of-inaction narratives, and compelling summaries. Use when generating executive summaries, pitch narratives, scenario value propositions, recommendation justifications, or any prose that must drive a decision.
From pmnpx claudepluginhub javimontano/mao-pm-apexThis skill is limited to using the following tools:
examples/README.mdexamples/sample-output.htmlexamples/sample-output.mdprompts/metaprompts.mdprompts/use-case-prompts.mdreferences/body-of-knowledge.mdreferences/knowledge-graph.mmdreferences/state-of-the-art.mdSearches, retrieves, and installs Agent Skills from prompts.chat registry using MCP tools like search_skills and get_skill. Activates for finding skills, browsing catalogs, or extending Claude.
Searches prompts.chat for AI prompt templates by keyword or category, retrieves by ID with variable handling, and improves prompts via AI. Use for discovering or enhancing prompts.
Provides process, architecture, review, hiring, and testing guidelines for engineering teams relying on AI code generation.
Transforms technical findings into decision-driving prose. Owns value propositions, calls to action, cost-of-inaction narratives, executive summaries, and recommendation justifications across all discovery deliverables.
The best copy does not convince — it reveals what the reader already knows but has not articulated. A C-level executive knows they have technical debt. They do not need to be told. They need the cost of inaction quantified and a clear path shown with options. Copy transforms data into decisions.
$1 — Target audience: ceo, cto, cfo, board, mixed (default: mixed)$2 — Deliverable context: pitch, scenario, roadmap, summary, recommendation (default: summary)Parse from $ARGUMENTS.
Structure: [Quantified benefit] + [for whom] + [eliminating what pain] + [in what timeframe]
Example:
BAD: "Improve the system architecture"
GOOD: "Reduce time-to-market from 12 to 4 weeks, freeing 3 FTE-months/quarter
currently consumed by workarounds in the legacy system"
Pattern: [Quantified current state] → [Trend if no action] → [Cumulative impact] → [Point of no return]
Framing: "Each quarter without action costs [X] and accumulates [Y] of additional technical debt.
In [Z] months, the remediation cost exceeds the transformation cost."
| Phase | Purpose | Technique |
|---|---|---|
| Problem | State pain with data | Metrics, benchmarks, evidence tags |
| Agitate | Show consequences of inaction | COI projection, trend extrapolation |
| Solve | Present solution with options | 3 scenarios, recommended path highlighted |
Structure: [Specific action] + [concrete timeline] + [immediate next step] + [what happens if not]
Example:
BAD: "It is recommended to proceed with modernization"
GOOD: "Approving scenario B (incremental modernization) this week allows
starting Sprint 0 in Q2 and capturing the first quick win (API gateway)
before July. → Next step: alignment workshop with technical team."
| Audience | Tone | Lead With | Avoid |
|---|---|---|---|
| CEO | Strategic, visionary | Competitive advantage, positioning | Technical jargon, implementation details |
| CTO | Technical-strategic | Technical risk, modernization | Excessive simplifications |
| CFO | Financial, quantitative | NPV, payback, cost avoidance | Narratives without numbers |
| Board | Governance, fiduciary | Risk-adjusted ROI, compliance | Operational detail |
| Mixed | Progressive: impact → technical | Impact headline + progressive depth | Assuming a single profile |
| Anti-Pattern | Correction |
|---|---|
| "It is worth noting that..." | Eliminate — go straight to the point |
| "It is important to highlight..." | Eliminate — if it were important, it needs no announcement |
| "It is recommended to consider..." | Recommend directly with evidence |
| Passive voice without agent | Active voice: who does what |
| Numbers without context | Always compare: vs baseline, vs industry, vs target |
| Assertions without evidence | Mandatory tag: [CÓDIGO], [CONFIG], [DOC], [INFERENCIA] |
| Superlatives without support | "The best" → "Superior by X% according to [metric]" |
Before delivery, every copy section must pass:
| Criterion | Check |
|---|---|
| Every claim has evidence tag | [CÓDIGO], [CONFIG], [DOC], [INFERENCIA], [SUPUESTO] |
| Every number has context | vs baseline, vs benchmark, vs target |
| COI is quantified | FTE-months, cost/quarter, trend projection |
| CTA is specific | Action + timeline + next step |
| Zero filler phrases | No filler constructions, no "undoubtedly" |
| Audience tone match | Calibrated per target audience |
| Caso Borde | Estrategia de Manejo |
|---|---|
| No hay datos cuantitativos disponibles | Usar evidencia cualitativa con tags [INFERENCIA] explicitos. Enmarcar como "basado en patrones observados en [N] archivos/modulos/entrevistas". Declarar limitacion en la primera linea del entregable. |
| Multiples audiencias en el mismo documento | Aplicar progressive disclosure: headline ejecutivo + detalle tecnico expandible. Usar callouts diferenciados por audiencia. Nunca asumir un solo perfil de lector. |
| Recomendacion controversial o con riesgo politico | Presentar todas las opciones con igual rigor. Recomendar con evidencia explicita. Documentar dissent en registro de riesgos. Incluir seccion "Consideraciones Alternativas" antes del CTA. |
| El cliente solicita copy en idioma diferente al espanol | Producir en el idioma solicitado manteniendo la estructura y tecnicas. Documentar terminologia clave en ambos idiomas. Priorizar claridad sobre estilo literario. |
| Decision | Justificacion | Alternativa Descartada |
|---|---|---|
| Evidencia antes que afirmacion como regla absoluta | Credibilidad con audiencias ejecutivas requiere datos primero. Un C-level detecta copy sin sustento en segundos. | Afirmar y luego justificar: percibido como opinion no fundamentada. |
| Opciones sobre mandatos (3 escenarios) | El decision-maker elige; el consultor recomienda con evidencia. Aumenta ownership de la decision. | Recomendacion unica: percibida como imposicion, genera resistencia. |
| Conciseness radical sobre exhaustividad | Tiempo de atencion ejecutivo es limitado. Cada palabra debe aportar informacion o mover al lector. | Prosa exhaustiva: pierde la audiencia ejecutiva en el segundo parrafo. |
| COI cuantificado sobre urgencia declarada | "El costo de inaccion es X FTE-meses/trimestre" es verificable y accionable. "Es urgente actuar" es opinion. | Urgencia declarada: no diferencia de cualquier otra recomendacion. |
graph TD
subgraph Core["Core: Copywriting"]
VP[Value Proposition]
COI[Cost-of-Inaction]
CTA[Call to Action]
PAS[Problem-Agitate-Solve]
end
subgraph Inputs["Inputs"]
AUD[Audiencia Target]
FIND[Hallazgos Tecnicos]
METRICS[Metricas y Datos]
CTX[Contexto del Entregable]
end
subgraph Outputs["Outputs"]
EXEC_SUM[Executive Summary]
PITCH[Pitch Narrative]
SCENARIO[Scenario Value Props]
RECO[Recommendation Copy]
end
subgraph Related["Related Skills"]
STORY[storytelling]
DATASTORY[data-storytelling]
TECHWRITE[technical-writing]
EDITORIAL[editorial-director]
end
AUD --> VP
FIND --> PAS
METRICS --> COI
CTX --> CTA
VP --> EXEC_SUM
COI --> PITCH
PAS --> SCENARIO
CTA --> RECO
STORY --> Core
DATASTORY --> METRICS
TECHWRITE --> FIND
EDITORIAL --> Core
Filename: Executive_Summary_{project}_{WIP|Aprobado}.md
# Resumen Ejecutivo: {project}
## Headline
{Una linea: beneficio cuantificado + para quien + eliminando que dolor}
## Situacion Actual
{2-3 parrafos: estado actual con evidencia [TAGS], metricas con contexto}
## Costo de Inaccion
{Proyeccion cuantificada: FTE-meses/trimestre, tendencia, punto de no retorno}
## Opciones
| Escenario | Inversion (FTE-meses) | Beneficio | Timeline | Riesgo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
## Recomendacion
{Escenario recomendado con justificacion basada en evidencia}
## Siguiente Paso
{Accion especifica + timeline + que pasa si no se actua}
Filename: Executive_Summary_{project}_{WIP|Aprobado}.html
HTML self-contained branded (Design System MetodologIA v5). Dark-First Executive. Incluye headline hero con metricas de impacto, COI projection visual, y comparativa de escenarios con CTA destacado. WCAG AA, responsive.
Filename: {fase}_Executive_Summary_{project}_{WIP}.docx
Via python-docx con Design System MetodologIA v5. Cover page, TOC auto, headers/footers branded, tablas zebra. Poppins headings (navy), Montserrat body, gold accents.
Filename: {fase}_Executive_Summary_{cliente}_{WIP}.xlsx
Via openpyxl con MetodologIA Design System v5. Headers con fondo navy y tipografía Poppins en blanco, conditional formatting por escenario y prioridad, auto-filters en todas las columnas, valores directos sin fórmulas.
Filename: {fase}_{entregable}_{cliente}_{WIP}.pptx
Via python-pptx con MetodologIA Design System v5. Slide master con gradiente navy, titulos Poppins, cuerpo Montserrat, acentos gold. Max 20 slides (ejecutiva) / 30 slides (tecnica). Speaker notes con referencias de evidencia. Para comites directivos y presentaciones C-level.
Filename: Pitch_{project}_{WIP|Aprobado}.html
Estructura HTML con secciones:
- Hero: headline con metricas de impacto
- Problem: estado actual con datos y evidencia visual
- Agitate: costo de inaccion con proyeccion temporal
- Solve: 3 escenarios con comparativa visual
- CTA: accion recomendada con timeline y siguiente paso
- Footer: atribucion MetodologIA + evidencia tags summary
Estilo: colores MetodologIA (#6366F1 primary, #0F172A background)
| Dimension | Peso | Criterio |
|---|---|---|
| Trigger Accuracy | 10% | Se activa ante solicitudes de copy ejecutivo, pitch, value proposition, CTA, o resumen persuasivo |
| Completeness | 25% | Incluye value proposition construida, COI cuantificado, CTA especifico, y tono calibrado por audiencia |
| Clarity | 20% | Cero frases de relleno; cada afirmacion tiene evidencia; voz activa predominante |
| Robustness | 20% | Produce copy efectivo con datos parciales, multiples audiencias, y recomendaciones controversiales |
| Efficiency | 10% | Genera copy listo para entrega con parametros minimos (audiencia + contexto) |
| Value Density | 15% | Cada parrafo contiene informacion accionable; ratio de conversion dato-a-decision es alto |
Umbral minimo: 7/10
metodologia-storytelling — Arco narrativo cross-deliverable que el copy apoyametodologia-data-storytelling — Metricas interpretadas que el copy consumemetodologia-technical-writing — Precision documental que el copy transforma en prosa ejecutivametodologia-editorial-director — Coordinacion editorial cross-entregable