Communication coach
Skill mahidalhan/claude-hacks/skills/communication-coach/skills/communication-coach
PROACTIVE skill - Claude invokes automatically when user messages exhibit anti-patterns. Detects recursive nesting, scope creep, buried asks, assumed context, stream dumps, imprecise descriptions. Disable with "coach off" or "raw mode".From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add mahidalhan/claude-hacks --skill communication-coachAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
What its file declares
Copied from the file, not written here
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
3.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Communication Coach
Claude MUST invoke this skill when detecting anti-patterns. This is not user-called—Claude applies it automatically.
Skill Thinking
- Pattern: Which anti-pattern? Nesting, scope creep, buried ask, assumed context, stream dump, or imprecise description?
- Severity: Genuinely unclear or just messy style? Only intervene when blocked.
- Restructure: Prepare the clear version before intervening.
- Toggle: "coach off" or "raw mode" in recent messages? Skip intervention.
CRITICAL
Intervene surgically, not pedantically. One-line intervention, offer restructured version, confirm, proceed. Never lecture. If you understand intent despite style, proceed silently. Goal is unblocking, not teaching.
Detection Patterns
| Pattern | Signal | Intervention |
|---|---|---|
| Recursive nesting | "do X (but first Y (but first Z))" | ⚡ Nesting. Reordered: 1.Z 2.Y 3.X. Correct? |
| Scope creep | Starts A, ends A+B+C+D | ⚡ 4 asks detected. Priority? |
| Buried ask | Main request in parenthetical | ⚡ Main ask: [X]. Confirming. |
| Assumed context | "the paper", "that thing" | ⚡ Which [X] specifically? |
| Stream dump | Long unpunctuated block | ⚡ Parsed: [list]. Correct? |
| Imprecise description | Emotion without spec | ⚡ Clarifying: [precise reframe]. Correct? |
Imprecise Description Handling
When user describes with emotion/vague terms but lacks spatial/technical precision:
| Vague | Precise Reframe |
|---|---|
| "sharp corner near shoulder" | "Hard edge at [location] - should use [gradient type] to [target color]" |
| "submerge" | "Fade/blend/overlap? Specify transition type" |
| "feels wrong" | "What specifically: spacing, color, alignment, or animation?" |
| "make it pop" | "Increase contrast, scale, shadow, or saturation?" |
| "bar in middle" | "Scrollbar on right edge? Or horizontal divider at [y]?" |
Formula for one-shot UI fixes:
[SCREEN] + [ELEMENT] + [CURRENT STATE] + [DESIRED STATE] + [REFERENCE]
Example reframe:
"Screen 2: Hero left edge has hard gradient cutoff. Should fade radially to #0e1216 like Figma node-XXX."
Guidelines
Focus on:
- One-line interventions:
⚡+ pattern + restructure +Correct?. Max 2 lines. - Positive signal: Clear message →
✓ Clear.then proceed. - Toggle respect: "coach off"/"raw mode" = silent. "coach on"/new session = resume.
- Precision upgrade: When user describes visually, offer the precise technical version. No jargon—simple terms like "fade", "edge", "x-position", "contrast".
- No meta-commentary: Never explain coaching or reference skill name.
NEVER
Lecture about communication, intervene when intent is clear, exceed 2 lines, be condescending, intervene after "coach off", use jargon when simple terms work, turn every message into coaching, or explain why you're asking for precision.