From grace
Help the user surface methodology-level feedback about GRACE — unclear guidance, missing capability, friction in a skill, ideas for improvement, or bugs in the plugin itself. Walks the user through articulating the issue, applies a data-sensitivity check, and delivers the feedback as a Gmail draft to [email protected] (falls back to a copy-ready markdown block if Gmail tools are unavailable). Use when the user says things like "I want to flag something about GRACE", "the methodology could be better at X", "send feedback", or invokes `/grace:feedback`.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/grace:feedbacksonnetThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
This skill helps the user articulate and send methodology-level feedback
This skill helps the user articulate and send methodology-level feedback about GRACE itself — not project work performed under GRACE. Typical feedback shapes:
The output is a Gmail draft in the user's account, addressed to
[email protected], that the user can review, edit, and send. If
Gmail tools are not available, fall back to a copy-ready markdown block.
Move through the steps in order. Keep each prompt short. One question at a time when the user needs to think.
Ask the user what they want to flag. If their opening prompt already
contains the substance (e.g. /grace:feedback the consultant-reflex rule fires too eagerly on trivial edits), use that as the seed and skip to
Step 2.
If they invoked the skill with no content, ask:
What's on your mind about GRACE? It can be unclear guidance, a missing capability, friction with a skill or rule, a bug, or just an idea.
Reflect back what you heard in one sentence, then probe for the information that makes feedback actionable. Ask at most two of these, chosen by what the seed already covers:
Do not push for all four. If the user is venting an impression rather than reporting an incident, that is still valid feedback — capture it as an impression.
Produce a short summary the user can confirm or correct. Format:
**Subject:** <one-line headline, max ~70 chars>
**Context:** <what they were doing / where this came up>
**Issue:** <what felt wrong, unclear, or missing>
**Suggestion (optional):** <their idea, if they offered one>
**Affected:** <skill / rule / template / docs, if known>
Ask: "Does that capture it? Anything to add or change?"
Before drafting the email, walk the user through a brief sensitivity review. Say something like:
Quick check before drafting the email. This will go to [email protected], which is outside any project's trust boundary. Please make sure the summary above does not include:
- Patient information (PHI)
- Student records (FERPA-protected data)
- Specific customer names, account IDs, or contract terms
- Credentials, API keys, or internal URLs
- Confidential business strategy or financial figures
If your example needs to reference something sensitive, paraphrase or use a placeholder like
<a specific customer>.
Ask: "Anything in the summary you'd like to redact or rephrase?"
Apply any redactions the user requests. Do not scan the content yourself for sensitivity patterns — the user owns this judgment. The prompt is a reminder, not a gate.
Ask:
Want to include a way for me to follow up if I have questions? Your name, email, or Slack handle — whatever you're comfortable sharing. You can also skip this and stay anonymous.
If they share contact info, append it to the draft. If they skip, include a single line "(submitted without follow-up contact)" so the recipient knows it was an explicit choice rather than forgotten.
Compose the email body in this shape:
GRACE methodology feedback.
<one short framing sentence>
Context
-------
<the context paragraph from the summary>
Issue
-----
<the issue paragraph from the summary>
Suggestion
----------
<the suggestion paragraph, or omit this section if none>
Affected
--------
<skill / rule / template / docs reference>
Follow-up
---------
<contact info, or "(submitted without follow-up contact)">
---
Submitted via /grace:feedback. Plugin version: <if discoverable from
.claude/grace-methodology-version, otherwise omit this line>.
Subject line: the headline from Step 3.
Recipient: [email protected].
Now create the Gmail draft. Prefer the Gmail draft tool
(mcp__claude_ai_Gmail__create_draft) with these parameters:
to: ["[email protected]"]subject: the headlinebody: the composed body aboveIf the Gmail tool is available and succeeds, report:
Drafted in your Gmail. Open your Gmail Drafts folder, review it alongside the original conversation, edit if needed, and send when you're ready.
If the Gmail tool is not available or the call fails, fall back to printing the email as a copy-ready markdown block:
**To:** [email protected]
**Subject:** <headline>
<body>
Then say:
Gmail draft tools aren't available in this environment. Copy the block above into your email client, review it, and send when you're ready.
Briefly thank the user. Do not promise a response timeline; the recipient is one person and follow-up is best-effort.
/grace:feedback
exists, but not the contents of any individual feedback.)[email protected]. If the user asks to send to someone else,
decline and suggest they edit the draft in Gmail after it is created.Provides behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes, focusing on simplicity, surgical changes, assumption surfacing, and verifiable success criteria.
Searches, 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.
npx claudepluginhub grace-method/grace-marketplace --plugin grace