performance-review▌
anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins · updated Apr 8, 2026
If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see CONNECTORS.md.
/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.
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.5★★★★★51 reviews- ★★★★★Arjun Bansal· Dec 28, 2024
Registry listing for performance-review matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Dec 16, 2024
Keeps context tight: performance-review is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Arjun Abebe· Dec 12, 2024
performance-review fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Henry Verma· Nov 19, 2024
Useful defaults in performance-review — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Nikhil Mensah· Nov 3, 2024
performance-review has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Anika Iyer· Oct 22, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: performance-review is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Charlotte Martin· Oct 10, 2024
I recommend performance-review for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Rahul Santra· Sep 13, 2024
performance-review has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Nia Choi· Sep 13, 2024
Useful defaults in performance-review — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Amelia Haddad· Sep 9, 2024
performance-review has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
showing 1-10 of 51