git:20260816.5c37a02 to git:20260907.364596e

---

name: consult-governance

sheetId: "2.45"

description: >-

The weekly hygiene sweep across the WHOLE consulting portfolio — inventory

every numbered [N] engagement folder under the consult Drive parent AND every

open consult deal in the CRM, diff the two against six invariants

(deal↔folder backlink, kickoff-doc presence, session-note recency, [N]

numbering continuity, activity pulse, artifact chain), and emit a zh-TW

ready-to-apply changelist in the chat. Strictly READ-ONLY — it proposes

fixes named to the owning skill but never applies one: no Doc creation, no

folder moves, no CRM writes, not even a deal-note append. Trigger on

/consult-governance or when Peter says "顧問案健檢", "檢查顧問專案",

"顧問 portfolio 盤點", "案子有沒有漏", "consult drift check", "audit the

engagement folders", or "portfolio hygiene sweep". Distinct from

admin-governance (local _INDEX.md ↔ Drive KNOWLEDGE governance — a different

universe), from consult-status-report (ONE engagement, client-facing, writes

a Gmail draft; this is ALL engagements, internal, writes nothing), and from

consult-intake / consult-project-specialist (they OWN the fixes this report

proposes — folder creation, numbering, backlinks).

category: sales-consultant

project: consult-governance

platform: claude

status: Done

author: Peter Tu

input: "Optional: look-back windows (notes-recency days, activity-pulse days), or a single company to spot-check; defaults 21 / 14, whole portfolio"

process: "Inventory [N] folders under the consult Drive parent → inventory open deals + activity (read-only CRM) → cross-check the six invariants (backlink, kickoff, notes recency, numbering, activity pulse, artifact chain) → findings + 建議動作 per case → summary + 本次未檢查"

output: "A zh-TW portfolio hygiene report in the chat — findings per engagement with owning-skill fix pointers, a summary table, and an explicit not-checked list; nothing written anywhere"

synergy:

- "consult-intake"

- "consult-project-specialist"

- "consult-status-report"

- "admin-governance"

---

# Consult Governance

```bash

npx skills add https://github.com/peter-tu-zynkr/zynkr-skill-builder --skill consult-governance

```

Every consulting engagement leaves a paper trail in two places — a numbered

`[N]` folder in Drive and a deal in the CRM — and the whole 2.x suite assumes

the two stay in lockstep. They drift anyway: a backlink never written, a

`[Notes]` doc that stopped three weeks ago, a build-stage deal with no `[PRD]`.

This skill is the weekly sweep that catches the drift: it inventories both

sides of the whole portfolio, diffs them against six invariants, and emits a

zh-TW changelist where every finding names the exact fix and the skill that

owns it.

It is deliberately **read-only** — the report lives in the chat reply and

nowhere else. It never creates a Doc, never renames a folder, never touches a

deal, not even to append a note. A sweep that can write needs babysitting; a

sweep that only reports can run every Monday without fear.

## How this differs from its neighbours

- **admin-governance** — the pattern source, but a different universe: it

reconciles local `_INDEX.md` files against Drive KNOWLEDGE folders (LOB

docs). This skill reconciles the consulting *engagement* portfolio — CRM

deals ↔ `[N]` project folders.

- **consult-status-report** — ONE engagement, client-facing, produces a Gmail

draft. This skill is ALL engagements, internal-only, and writes nothing.

- **consult-intake / consult-project-specialist** — they OWN the fixes this

report proposes: folder creation, `[N]` numbering, deal backlinks. This

skill points at them; it never does their job.

## Fixed facts (don't re-derive these)

- **Google account** for all Drive/Docs tools: `peter_tu@zynkr.ai`

- **Drive parent folder** (`[2.2] 業務與顧問部門：專案`, where the numbered `[N]` folders live): `1hkXPX7OXPFOU0BcloPbJSFp8O0zArM8t`

- **CRM deal URL** for report lines: `https://platform.zynkr.ai/deals/{deal_id}`

## Hard rules

1. **Read-only, absolutely.** No Doc creation, no folder moves or renames, no

CRM writes — not even a deal-note append. The report exists only in the

chat reply.

2. **A missing folder is a finding, never a task.** The 2.x resolution rule

(no `[N]` folder ⇒ STOP and route to /consult-intake or

/consult-project-specialist) applies here as a *report line*, not an

action — this skill never creates a folder under any circumstances.

3. **Every finding carries a 建議動作** naming the owning skill (or the exact

one-line manual edit). A problem without a routed fix is not a finding,

it's noise.

4. **Honesty over completeness.** Anything skipped — unparseable folder

names, deals that can't be classified as consult work — is listed under

本次未檢查, never silently dropped.

## What this skill explicitly does not do

- Does **not** fix anything. /consult-intake owns folders, numbering and

backlinks; /consult-project-specialist owns meeting-born engagements;

/consult-brd-writer and /consult-uat-writer own the artifact chain;

/consult-session-notes owns `[Notes]`.

- Does **not** write to the CRM — no note appends, no stage moves, no tasks.

- Does **not** create, move, rename, or trash anything in Drive.

- Does **not** read Doc *contents* — it audits existence, titles, and

`modifiedTime` only. An empty `[BRD]` with the right title passes I6.

- Does **not** email anyone. (If a finding ever turns into client-facing

mail, that runs through the owning skill's Gmail-DRAFT rule — never sent.)

---

## Workflow

### 1 · Resolve scope

Defaults: whole portfolio · notes-recency window **21 days** · activity-pulse

window **14 days**. Peter may override either window or name a single company

to spot-check.

Single-company mode uses the standard resolution: deal via

is missing, that IS the finding (I1) — report it and check whatever half

exists; per hard rule 2, never create anything.

Compute both cutoffs as dates up front and print them in the report header.

### 2 · Inventory Drive

List the parent: `mcp__google-workspace__list_drive_items(user_google_email=

"peter_tu@zynkr.ai", folder_id="1hkXPX7OXPFOU0BcloPbJSFp8O0zArM8t",

page_size=100)`. Parse every folder name against the `[N] Company（project）`

convention, capturing number · company · project. Names that don't parse go

to 本次未檢查 (and raise an I4 finding).

Then list *each* `[N]` folder the same way to capture its contents: the

kickoff/context doc, and any `[Notes]` / `[BRD]` / `[PRD]` / `[UAT]` docs with

their `modifiedTime`. This per-folder pass feeds I2, I3 and I6.

### 3 · Inventory the CRM (read-only)

**Classifying "consult deals":** a deal counts as consult work if its notes

carry a `專案資料夾` backlink OR its company matches a `[N]` folder by name.

Open deals matching neither may be pure sales pipeline — they go to

本次未檢查 ("無法判別是否顧問案"), not into the findings.

### 4 · Cross-check the six invariants

Run every engagement through `./references/hygiene-checklist.md` — that file

is the contract for what each invariant checks, which tool + field answers it,

and the exact 問題 → 建議動作 line format. In one breath:

| ID | Invariant | Window |

|----|-----------|--------|

| I1 | deal ↔ folder backlink resolves, 1:1 both ways | — |

| I2 | kickoff/context Doc present in every `[N]` folder | — |

| I3 | past-discovery engagements have a fresh `[Notes]` | 21d |

| I4 | `[N]` numbering: no gaps, no duplicates, names conform | — |

| I5 | open deals show CRM activity (else 停滯) | 14d |

| I6 | stage ⇒ artifact: proposal→[BRD] · build→[PRD] · UAT→[UAT] | — |

### 5 · Emit the report

zh-TW, findings-only: one section per engagement **with** findings; quiet

engagements roll into a single ✅ count line. Shape:

```

顧問案健檢 — 2026-08-03（回溯 21 / 14 天）

## [4] 宏宇精密（報價流程自動化）— 2 項發現

- I3 · 問題：最後一份 [Notes] 停在 2026-07-05，已超過 21 天

建議動作：跑 /consult-session-notes 補紀錄（最後一份停在 2026-07-05）

- I6 · 問題：deal 在 build 階段（https://platform.zynkr.ai/deals/…），資料夾內沒有 [PRD]

建議動作：跑 /consult-brd-writer（PRD 模式）產出 [PRD]

## [7] 王小明工作室（未命名）— 1 項發現

- I1 · 問題：deal notes 缺 專案資料夾 backlink（資料夾以公司名對到 [7]）

建議動作：deal notes 補上 專案資料夾：<folder url>（照 /consult-intake 的 backlink 格式；本技能不寫入）

✅ 其餘 5 個 engagement 乾淨（[1] [2] [3] [5] [6]）

| 統計 | 數量 |

|------|------|

| 掃描 engagement | 7 |

| 乾淨 | 5 |

| 發現（依 invariant）| I1×1 · I2×0 · I3×1 · I4×0 · I5×0 · I6×1 |

本次未檢查：

- 資料夾「舊案歸檔」：無 [N] 編號，內容無法歸屬（另列 I4 發現）

- deal「詢價（無公司）」：無公司也無資料夾對應，無法判別是否顧問案

```

Every finding line quotes its evidence (the stale date, the missing title,

the deal URL); every 建議動作 names the owning skill. Findings sort by

engagement number; within an engagement, by invariant ID.

### 6 · Close with 本次未檢查

The report is not done until the honesty list is written — even when empty

("本次未檢查：無"). Include: unparseable folder names, unclassifiable deals,

any I5 degradation (activities table not found → pulse ran on `updated_at`

only), and any listing call that errored mid-sweep. An audit that silently

skips is worse than no audit.

---

## Why it's built this way

- **Report-only, borrowed from admin-governance.** A weekly ritual must be

safe to fire without review; the moment a sweep can write, every run needs

babysitting and the ritual dies. Proposing beats fixing.

- **Fixes route to owning skills.** consult-intake owns numbering and

backlinks; brd-writer owns the artifact chain. One fix implementation per

artifact means the fix logic can't fork — this report is a dispatcher, not

a second implementation.

- **Findings-only sections + a ✅ roll-up.** At portfolio scale most

engagements are clean most weeks; admin-governance's "Clean ✓" discipline

keeps the signal-to-noise high enough that Peter actually reads it.

- **The checklist lives in a reference file.** The six invariants are a

contract (tool + field + fix-line format); keeping them out of the workflow

prose means they can tighten without the workflow churning.

## Inference defaults (Peter overrides by just saying so)

- **Windows** → 21 days (notes recency) · 14 days (activity pulse).

- **Scope** → whole portfolio; single-company only when a company is named.

- **"Open deal"** → any stage that isn't closed-won/closed-lost per

`list_deal_stages` (confirm the actual slugs at run time).

- **"Past discovery" (I3 applies)** → stage at or past proposal.

- **Report language** → zh-TW body; invariant IDs stay English (I1–I6).

- **Sort order** → by engagement number, then invariant ID.

## Provenance

Pattern-borrowed from `admin-governance` (3.05) — structure only, no copied

content; no drift exposure.

## Reference files

- `./references/hygiene-checklist.md` — the six invariant definitions: what

each checks, the tool + field that answers it, violation shapes, and the

exact 問題 → 建議動作 line format the report must use.

## Limitations

- Proposes only — someone (or the owning skill) still has to run the fixes;

next week's sweep is the verification that they happened.

- Consult-deal classification is heuristic (backlink or folder-name match);

ambiguous deals land in 本次未檢查, not in the findings.

- Audits titles and `modifiedTime`, never contents — an empty `[BRD]` passes

I6, and a kickoff doc renamed away from its convention reads as missing.

- Activity pulse only sees what the CRM recorded — un-logged calls and

offline work show up as 停滯 (the I5 fix line says how to correct that).

- Point-in-time snapshot; it keeps no history and computes no week-over-week

trend.