AI 스킬Structure reviewHR 및 채용
Structure self-assessments, manager reviews, calibration prep, and actionable feedback. — Claude Skill
Claude Code용 Claude 스킬 · 제공: Anthropic✓ · 실행: /performance-review (Claude 내)·업데이트: 2026년 6월 13일·vmain@da04ccb
Creates performance review templates for employees and managers, turning vague feedback into specific examples, goal evidence, development plans, calibration tables, and comp recommendations for review.
- Supports self-assessment, manager review, and calibration modes.
- Structures feedback around accomplishments, goals, strengths, development areas, and evidence.
- Creates rating distribution and promotion candidate tables for calibration.
- Pushes feedback toward specific behaviors and actions instead of vague labels.
사용자오늘
Managers write reviews from memory, with vague feedback and inconsistent evidence.
/performance-review 사용 시
Run /performance-review to structure evidence, ratings, development plans, calibration points, and manager-ready feedback.
1 Pick review mode2 Paste goals and evidence3 Generate template4 Review rating and development actions
대상
기능
Manager review drafting
Turn notes and project evidence into a structured review draft.
Calibration prep
Prepare rating distribution, promotion cases, and discussion points.
Self-assessment guide
Give employees a clearer structure for accomplishments, goals, and growth.
작동 방식
1
Collect review cycle, mode, employee or team context, goals, evidence, and rating guidance.
2
Generate the right template: self-assessment, manager review, or calibration prep.
3
Organize evidence by goals, strengths, development areas, impact, and next-period goals.
4
Flag vague feedback and missing evidence for manager review.
입력 옵션
Review mode
Self-assessment, manager review, or calibration.
예시
Review context
Mode: manager review Employee: Alex Rivera Role: Support Operations Lead Period: Q2 2026 Goals: - Reduce first response time below 2 hours - Improve escalation quality - Launch new support macros Evidence: - First response time improved from 3.1h to 1.7h - Escalation QA score moved from 78% to 89% - Macro launch shipped two weeks late but reduced repeated replies by 18% Concern: needs stronger cross-functional planning with Product Need: manager review draft with rating, strengths, development plan, and calibration notes.
Performance review draft
Performance summary
Overall Rating: Meets Expectations, trending toward Exceeds if cross-functional planning improves. Alex delivered meaningful support operations improvements this quarter. First response time moved below target, escalation quality improved materially, and the macro launch reduced repeated replies. The main development area is earlier planning with Product when support work depends on product changes.
Goal achievement
| Goal | Rating | Comments | |---|---|---| | Reduce first response time below 2 hours | Exceeded | Improved from 3.1h to 1.7h and sustained target for the final month | | Improve escalation quality | Met / Exceeded | QA score improved from 78% to 89%, with fewer missing reproduction steps | | Launch support macros | Met with timing concern | Shipped two weeks late, but reduced repeated replies by 18% after launch |
Key strengths
- Operational ownership: Alex moved a core support metric from above target to below target and kept the queue stable. - Quality focus: Escalation notes became clearer, which helped Product and Engineering act faster. - Practical automation: Macro work reduced repeated replies and created a reusable base for future support workflows.
Areas for development
- Cross-functional planning: Involve Product earlier when support changes depend on roadmap or tooling decisions. - Timeline communication: The macro launch delay was manageable, but the risk should have been escalated before the deadline slipped. - Next action: For the next support automation project, create a stakeholder map and weekly milestone review before work starts.
Development plan and calibration notes
| Skill | Current | Target | Actions | |---|---|---|---| | Cross-functional planning | Reactive stakeholder engagement | Proactive planning before delivery risk | Create launch plan template; review with Product by week 1 | | Executive summary writing | Clear operational detail | Sharper leadership-level summaries | Send weekly metric narrative with decision needed / risk / next step | Calibration note: Evidence supports a strong Meets rating. Promotion should wait until Alex demonstrates proactive cross-functional planning across a full project cycle.
개선되는 지표
Review Completion Rate
Keeps review and calibration steps on schedule.
HR 및 채용Feedback Quality
Pushes reviews toward specific evidence and actionable development.
HR 및 채용Attrition Risk
Surfaces employees who may need retention, growth, or manager support.
HR 및 채용지원 도구
Performance Review을(를) 사용해 보시겠어요?
시작 방법을 선택하세요.
Claude Code에서 실행
무료. 오픈 소스.
이 스킬을 컴퓨터에 로컬로 설치하고 실행합니다.
1
Claude Code 설치
컴퓨터에서 터미널을 열고 이 명령을 붙여넣으세요:
2
스킬 설치
이 명령은 스킬과 모든 파일을 컴퓨터에 다운로드합니다:
모든 프로젝트에서 사용하려면 끝에 -g를 추가하세요.
3
GitHub에서 소스 보기 실행하기
Claude Code를 시작한 다음 명령을 입력하세요:
그다음
/performance-review
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Generate performance review templates and help structure feedback.
Usage
/performance-review $ARGUMENTS
Modes
/performance-review self-assessment # Generate self-assessment template
/performance-review manager [employee] # Manager review template for a specific person
/performance-review calibration # Calibration prep document
If no mode is specified, ask what type of review they need.
Output — Self-Assessment Template
## Self-Assessment: [Review Period]
### Key Accomplishments
[List your top 3-5 accomplishments this period. For each, describe the situation, your contribution, and the impact.]
1. **[Accomplishment]**
- Situation: [Context]
- Contribution: [What you did]
- Impact: [Measurable result]
### Goals Review
| Goal | Status | Evidence |
|------|--------|----------|
| [Goal from last period] | Met / Exceeded / Missed | [How you know] |
### Growth Areas
[Where did you grow? New skills, expanded scope, leadership moments.]
### Challenges
[What was hard? What would you do differently?]
### Goals for Next Period
1. [Goal — specific and measurable]
2. [Goal]
3. [Goal]
### Feedback for Manager
[How can your manager better support you?]
Output — Manager Review
## Performance Review: [Employee Name]
**Period:** [Date range] | **Manager:** [Your name]
### Overall Rating: [Exceeds / Meets / Below Expectations]
### Performance Summary
[2-3 sentence overall assessment]
### Key Strengths
- [Strength with specific example]
- [Strength with specific example]
### Areas for Development
- [Area with specific, actionable guidance]
- [Area with specific, actionable guidance]
### Goal Achievement
| Goal | Rating | Comments |
|------|--------|----------|
| [Goal] | [Rating] | [Specific observations] |
### Impact and Contributions
[Describe their biggest contributions and impact on the team/org]
### Development Plan
| Skill | Current | Target | Actions |
|-------|---------|--------|---------|
| [Skill] | [Level] | [Level] | [How to get there] |
### Compensation Recommendation
[Promotion / Equity refresh / Adjustment / No change — with justification]
Output — Calibration
## Calibration Prep: [Review Cycle]
**Manager:** [Your name] | **Team:** [Team] | **Period:** [Date range]
### Team Overview
| Employee | Role | Level | Tenure | Proposed Rating | Notes |
|----------|------|-------|--------|-----------------|-------|
| [Name] | [Role] | [Level] | [X years] | [Rating] | [Key context] |
### Rating Distribution
| Rating | Count | % of Team | Company Target |
|--------|-------|-----------|----------------|
| Exceeds Expectations | [X] | [X]% | ~15-20% |
| Meets Expectations | [X] | [X]% | ~60-70% |
| Below Expectations | [X] | [X]% | ~10-15% |
### Calibration Discussion Points
1. **[Employee]** — [Why this rating may need discussion, e.g., borderline, first review at level, recent role change]
2. **[Employee]** — [Discussion point]
### Promotion Candidates
| Employee | Current Level | Proposed Level | Justification |
|----------|-------------|----------------|---------------|
| [Name] | [Current] | [Proposed] | [Evidence of next-level performance] |
### Compensation Actions
| Employee | Action | Justification |
|----------|--------|---------------|
| [Name] | [Promotion / Equity refresh / Market adjustment / Retention] | [Why] |
### Manager Notes
[Context the calibration group should know — team changes, org shifts, project impacts]
If Connectors Available
If ~~HRIS is connected:
- Pull prior review history and goal tracking data
- Pre-populate employee details and current role information
If ~~project tracker is connected:
- Pull completed work and contributions for the review period
- Reference specific tickets and project milestones as evidence
Tips
- Be specific — "Great job" isn't feedback. "You reduced deploy time 40% by implementing the new CI pipeline" is.
- Balance positive and constructive — Both are essential. Neither should be a surprise.
- Focus on behaviors, not personality — "Your documentation has been incomplete" vs. "You're careless."
- Make development actionable — "Improve communication" is vague. "Present at the next team all-hands" is actionable.
참조 문서
name: performance-review description: Structure a performance review with self-assessment, manager template, and calibration prep. Use when review season kicks off and you need a self-assessment template, writing a manager review for a direct report, prepping rating distributions and promotion cases for calibration, or turning vague feedback into specific behavioral examples. argument-hint: "<employee name or review cycle>"
/performance-review
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
Generate performance review templates and help structure feedback.
Usage
/performance-review $ARGUMENTS
Modes
/performance-review self-assessment # Generate self-assessment template
/performance-review manager [employee] # Manager review template for a specific person
/performance-review calibration # Calibration prep document
If no mode is specified, ask what type of review they need.
Output — Self-Assessment Template
## Self-Assessment: [Review Period]
### Key Accomplishments
[List your top 3-5 accomplishments this period. For each, describe the situation, your contribution, and the impact.]
1. **[Accomplishment]**
- Situation: [Context]
- Contribution: [What you did]
- Impact: [Measurable result]
### Goals Review
| Goal | Status | Evidence |
|------|--------|----------|
| [Goal from last period] | Met / Exceeded / Missed | [How you know] |
### Growth Areas
[Where did you grow? New skills, expanded scope, leadership moments.]
### Challenges
[What was hard? What would you do differently?]
### Goals for Next Period
1. [Goal — specific and measurable]
2. [Goal]
3. [Goal]
### Feedback for Manager
[How can your manager better support you?]
Output — Manager Review
## Performance Review: [Employee Name]
**Period:** [Date range] | **Manager:** [Your name]
### Overall Rating: [Exceeds / Meets / Below Expectations]
### Performance Summary
[2-3 sentence overall assessment]
### Key Strengths
- [Strength with specific example]
- [Strength with specific example]
### Areas for Development
- [Area with specific, actionable guidance]
- [Area with specific, actionable guidance]
### Goal Achievement
| Goal | Rating | Comments |
|------|--------|----------|
| [Goal] | [Rating] | [Specific observations] |
### Impact and Contributions
[Describe their biggest contributions and impact on the team/org]
### Development Plan
| Skill | Current | Target | Actions |
|-------|---------|--------|---------|
| [Skill] | [Level] | [Level] | [How to get there] |
### Compensation Recommendation
[Promotion / Equity refresh / Adjustment / No change — with justification]
Output — Calibration
## Calibration Prep: [Review Cycle]
**Manager:** [Your name] | **Team:** [Team] | **Period:** [Date range]
### Team Overview
| Employee | Role | Level | Tenure | Proposed Rating | Notes |
|----------|------|-------|--------|-----------------|-------|
| [Name] | [Role] | [Level] | [X years] | [Rating] | [Key context] |
### Rating Distribution
| Rating | Count | % of Team | Company Target |
|--------|-------|-----------|----------------|
| Exceeds Expectations | [X] | [X]% | ~15-20% |
| Meets Expectations | [X] | [X]% | ~60-70% |
| Below Expectations | [X] | [X]% | ~10-15% |
### Calibration Discussion Points
1. **[Employee]** — [Why this rating may need discussion, e.g., borderline, first review at level, recent role change]
2. **[Employee]** — [Discussion point]
### Promotion Candidates
| Employee | Current Level | Proposed Level | Justification |
|----------|-------------|----------------|---------------|
| [Name] | [Current] | [Proposed] | [Evidence of next-level performance] |
### Compensation Actions
| Employee | Action | Justification |
|----------|--------|---------------|
| [Name] | [Promotion / Equity refresh / Market adjustment / Retention] | [Why] |
### Manager Notes
[Context the calibration group should know — team changes, org shifts, project impacts]
If Connectors Available
If ~~HRIS is connected:
- Pull prior review history and goal tracking data
- Pre-populate employee details and current role information
If ~~project tracker is connected:
- Pull completed work and contributions for the review period
- Reference specific tickets and project milestones as evidence
Tips
- Be specific — "Great job" isn't feedback. "You reduced deploy time 40% by implementing the new CI pipeline" is.
- Balance positive and constructive — Both are essential. Neither should be a surprise.
- Focus on behaviors, not personality — "Your documentation has been incomplete" vs. "You're careless."
- Make development actionable — "Improve communication" is vague. "Present at the next team all-hands" is actionable.