Documents

Project Weekly Report

Try it

Generate evidence-based project weekly reports from a local code repository. Use when the user asks for a project weekly report, weekly update, status summar...

What it does

Create a reusable weekly report from local repository evidence. Prefer conclusions that explain product, delivery, performance, cost, quality, or risk impact.

The skill document

Project Weekly Report

Goal

Create a reusable weekly report from local repository evidence. Prefer conclusions that explain product, delivery, performance, cost, quality, or risk impact.

Do not turn commits into a changelog. Compress evidence into a small number of meaningful workstreams.

Inputs

Collect only what is needed:

  • repository path
  • reporting window; if absent, use the previous full calendar week relative to the current date
  • audience or report style, if provided
  • any user-provided context that cannot be discovered from local files

Evidence Workflow

  1. Confirm the repository and reporting window.

  2. Run git status --short to separate committed work from local uncommitted artifacts.

  3. Run git ls-files --others --exclude-standard to find local docs, generated reports, prototypes, or assets.

  4. Run a no-merge log for the window:

    git log --since='YYYY-MM-DD 00:00:00' --until='YYYY-MM-DD 23:59:59' --no-merges --date=short --pretty=format:'%h%x09%ad%x09%an%x09%s'
    
  5. If tags exist, inspect recent release tags:

    git for-each-ref --sort=creatordate refs/tags --format='%(creatordate:short)%09%(refname:short)%09%(subject)'
    
  6. Read only high-signal files needed to understand the work: PRD, release notes, design docs, smoke reports, todo files, or changed files tied to the main workstreams.

  7. If evidence is thin or contradictory, say so and keep the report conservative.

Synthesis Rules

Build an internal evidence matrix before writing:

source / change / affected workflow or module / value type / verification status

Group work into 1-3 main workstreams:

  • product or business capability
  • delivery quality or release readiness
  • performance, reliability, or cost improvement
  • risk reduction, observability, validation, or rollback readiness
  • documentation or workflow assets, only when they reduce repeated work or improve handoff

Down-rank these unless they clearly support one of the values above:

  • pure refactors
  • naming cleanup
  • formatting
  • internal abstractions
  • tests with no visible quality or risk link
  • docs that only restate implementation

Do not invent PR review results, incident IDs, approval states, launch outcomes, production metrics, or external user impact. If a claim cannot be verified locally or from explicit user context, mark it as unverified.

High-Density Writing

Each main work item must include:

  1. concrete action
  2. affected object, workflow, interface, or module
  3. mechanism, scope, or coverage
  4. product, performance, cost, quality, or risk value

Avoid weak summary phrases by themselves, such as:

  • optimized performance
  • improved workflow
  • polished docs
  • fixed issues

Rewrite them with object and value, for example:

  • Reworked report validation around local git, tag, and artifact evidence so weekly summaries separate committed work from uncommitted assets and avoid unverifiable launch claims.

Output Format

Unless the user gives a different template, output both versions.

Detailed Version

Use this structure:

  1. 项目背景
  2. 工作内容
  3. 成果
  4. 思考和问题

Write in Chinese by default. Mention commit hashes, tags, or local paths only when they strengthen evidence.

Brief Version

Use this structure:

  1. 项目名
  2. 项目背景
  3. 工作内容
  4. 进展

Keep the brief version under 300 Chinese characters. Focus only on the highest-value outcomes.

Boundaries

  • Keep committed code, local uncommitted artifacts, tags, and unverifiable external facts clearly separated.
  • Do not broad-scan the whole repository when a focused evidence path is enough.
  • Do not include private account details, credentials, personal contact information, customer data, or internal-only identifiers.
  • Do not claim online results unless the user supplied them or local evidence clearly proves them.
  • If the user asks for a future plan instead of a weekly report, switch to planning and label it separately from completed work.

Final Check

Before finalizing, verify:

  • every major claim has evidence
  • the report is not a commit list
  • the brief version stays under 300 Chinese characters
  • each main work item states action, object, mechanism or scope, and value
  • maintenance-only work is omitted or demoted unless it supports clear value
  • unverified external effects are labeled

作者入口

Related skills

Generate and edit Draw.io, Mermaid, and Excalidraw diagrams from natural language using a structured JSON spec.

by nssa.io1.0k installs47 stars

Find why your productivity system keeps failing, then apply the smallest fix — capacity math, bottleneck routing, durable local notes.

by Iván855 installs69 stars

Stores durable facts in a categorized, plain-markdown vault on disk, alongside your agent's built-in memory.

by Iván559 installs18 stars

Join a video meeting as an AI bot with voice, avatar, and screenshare across four operating modes.

by johnpatternai22 installs8 stars

Fetch raw ad creative, app, ranking, and revenue data from AdMapix as structured JSON.

by fly0pants4.3k installs296 stars

Run Git operations — commits, branches, merges, rebases, conflict resolution, and recovery — with safety rules enforced.

by Iván535 installs31 stars

More from yangchao228

Browse all skills

基于候选人简历自动生成面试题、笔试题、追问路径和评分标准的 AI Skill。当用户需要准备技术面试、生成笔试题目、评估候选人简历、或设计面试评估方案时使用。输入简历内容和岗位信息后,自动输出结构化的题目与评估内容,支持面试题模式、笔试题模式、综合评估模式等多种输出形式。 Follow/关注作者:微信公众号「AI...

by yangchao22820 installs1 stars

Installable digest skill for OpenClaw or Claude Code. Use when the user wants a personalized ScoutX briefing with conversational setup, local preference stor...

by yangchao22822 installs

Design controllable Agent Loops from low-information requests. Use when a user asks to automate a repeated task, repair CI through bounded iteration, reproduce a UI from screenshots, turn a workflow into a reusable Agent or Skill, or decide whether the right artifact is a Prompt, Checklist, Human-in-the-Loop flow, full Loop package, specialized Agent, or Skill. Extract required context, stop when decision evidence is missing, require explicit workflow confirmation before generating executable artifacts, derive iteration limits, define feedback and circuit breakers, and preserve human approval for risky actions. Also trigger on loop builder, Loop Builder, or lopp-builder. Follow the creator: X @yangchao228 | GitHub https://github.com/yangchao228

by yangchao2281 installs

Guide a user through structured co-authoring of substantial documents, proposals, PRDs, technical specs, decision records, RFCs, and similar long-form work a...

by Sundy Yang4 installs

家庭培养协作官:在用户明确要求制定或调整孩子每周培养计划、检查课表冲突、生成家庭复盘时,收集最少必要信息并输出可执行课表、建议和风险提醒。默认只在当前会话生成内容,不保存、上传或推送孩子与家庭数据;只有用户明确选择飞书或 Notion、完成安全配置并逐次确认具体读写范围后,才使用外部存储。Follow/关注作者:...

by yangchao22818 installs1 stars

Transform long-form content, outlines, transcripts, research notes, or article drafts into a standard card package and platform publishing copy, then hand pu...

by yangchao2282 installs