Free Agent Skill
Negotiation Prep
Prepare for a high-stakes negotiation or hard conversation using tactical-empathy techniques associated with former FBI negotiator Chris Voss — labeling emotions, calibrated open-ended questions, mirroring, and getting to genuine "that's right" rather than a grudging "yes."
Use when: the user is preparing for a negotiation, a hard ask (raise, funding, pricing), a difficult conversation with a stakeholder, or a conflict where the other party's real position or constraints aren't yet clear. Not a fit for drafting the message itself in detail — pair with normal drafting help for that.
Install this skill
- Create a folder named `negotiation-prep`.
- Save the skill content below as `SKILL.md` inside that folder.
- Place the folder in `~/.codex/skills/` for Codex, `.cursor/skills/` for Cursor or `.claude/skills/` for Claude Code.
- Describe the task normally. Your agent loads the skill when its description matches.
---
name: negotiation-prep
description: Prepare for a high-stakes negotiation or hard conversation using tactical-empathy techniques associated with former FBI negotiator Chris Voss — labeling emotions, calibrated open-ended questions, mirroring, and getting to genuine "that's right" rather than a grudging "yes." Use whenever the user is preparing for a negotiation, a hard ask (raise, funding, pricing), a difficult conversation with a stakeholder, or a conflict where the other party's real position or constraints aren't yet clear. Not a fit for drafting the message itself in detail — pair with normal drafting help for that.
---
# Negotiation Prep
Most negotiation prep focuses only on what you want to say. This skill
focuses on the other side — their likely position, real constraints, and
the specific questions that would surface what they actually need instead
of what they say they need.
## The technique
**1. Separate their stated position from their underlying constraint.**
What they're asking for and what they actually need to be okay with are
often different. Ask: what would they need to be true for this to work
for them, that isn't the same as what they've literally asked for?
**2. Draft calibrated, open-ended questions, not closed ones.** Questions
starting with "how" or "what" that can't be answered yes/no put the
work of solving the problem onto the other side, which tends to produce
more honest information than a direct ask does. "How can we make this
work for both of us?" surfaces more than "can you come down on price?"
**3. Prepare labels, not arguments.** A label names an emotion or
position out loud without judgment — "it sounds like timing is the real
issue here" — and tends to get more genuine disclosure than arguing
against a stated position does. Draft 2-3 labels that might apply to their
likely state going into the conversation.
**4. Aim for "that's right," not "you're right."** "You're right" is often
just a way to end the conversation. "That's right" means they feel
genuinely understood, which is what actually produces movement. Prepare a
summary of their position specific and accurate enough that hearing it
back would produce a real "that's right."
**5. Know your walk-away, and don't fake urgency you don't have.** Be
honest with the user about what their actual alternative is (see
opportunity cost in `mental-models`) — a negotiator who doesn't know their
own walk-away tends to concede more than the situation requires.
**6. Prepare for the most likely objection specifically**, not a generic
one — ask what this particular counterpart, given what's known about
them, is most likely to push back on, and draft the response to that
exact objection.
## Output
The other side's likely real constraint, 2-3 draft calibrated questions,
1-2 draft labels, and the user's own honest walk-away point. Not a script
to read verbatim — a set of tools to use adaptively in the actual
conversation.
More free skills
Prompt Refiner
Turns a vague request into an executable brief without silently inventing missing requirements.
Decision Framer
Separates the real choice from noise, then tests options against explicit criteria and uncertainty.
Meeting to Actions
Converts messy notes into decisions, owned actions, deadlines and unresolved questions.
Calibrated Forecasting
Turn a vague prediction or unstated confidence level into an explicit, calibrated probability estimate, following the practices Philip Tetlock found separated "superforecasters" from everyone else — breaking questions into sub-questions, checking base rates, updating in small increments as new information arrives, and tracking predictions against outcomes.
Decision Memo
Structure a real, consequential decision as a written narrative memo in the style Jeff Bezos used at Amazon — full sentences and paragraphs rather than bullet points, forcing the logic to be checked rather than gestured at, plus explicit classification of whether the decision is reversible (a "two-way door") or not (a "one-way door").
Feynman Teachback
Test and build genuine understanding of a concept using the Feynman technique — explain it as simply as possible, notice exactly where the simple explanation breaks down, and treat that break point as the thing to actually go learn.
First Principles
Rebuild a problem from fundamental truths (physics, economics, unit costs, what's actually true regardless of convention) rather than by analogy to how things are normally done — the reasoning style associated with Elon Musk's approach to manufacturing cost problems and Richard Feynman's approach to physics problems.
Focus and Tradeoffs
Cut a bloated plan, roadmap, or list of priorities down to the one or two things that actually matter, in the tradition associated with Steve Jobs's product focus — "innovation is saying no to a thousand things."
Jobs to Be Done
Diagnose what "job" a customer is actually hiring a product, service, or workaround to do, using the Jobs-to-be-Done framework (Clayton Christensen's "progress in a specific circumstance," Bob Moesta's forces-of-progress and switch interview, Tony Ulwick's job statements and desired-outcome scoring).
Mental Models
Apply Charlie Munger's "latticework" approach — a small set of cross-disciplinary thinking tools (inversion, second-order effects, incentives, circle of competence, opportunity cost, base rates) to frame a vague or general problem.
Moat Analysis
Assess whether a competitive advantage is durable (a real "moat," in Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger's terms) or temporary, by checking it against the standard sources of durable advantage — switching costs, network effects, economies of scale, brand/trust, and regulatory or IP protection — rather than taking "we're ahead right now" at face value.
Postmortem / Retro
Extract a specific, reusable lesson after something succeeded or failed, following the principle (associated with Ray Dalio's "pain plus reflection equals progress") that outcomes only compound into better judgment if they're deliberately converted into a written, checkable lesson rather than just felt and moved past.
Premortem
Run a premortem — psychologist Gary Klein's technique of imagining a plan has already failed and working backward to explain why, which surfaces risks that forward planning misses because it counteracts the social and psychological pressure to seem confident.
Want this skill connected to a complete workflow?
Every skill is free and works independently. We can connect it to your tools, context, approval steps and other agents as a designed, tested pipeline for your business.