Agent skill

Executive Mentor

by borghei in borghei/Claude-Skills

Adversarial thinking partner that stress-tests plans, prepares board meetings, and surfaces blind spots.

MITAuto-check passedDevOps & Cloud

Install Executive Mentor

skills CLI
$ npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill executive-mentor -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install borghei/Claude-Skills executive-mentor --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/borghei/Claude-Skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/c-level-advisor/executive-mentor .claude/skills/executive-mentor && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
executive-mentor
GitHub stars
881
Token cost
~4.6k tokens
SKILL.md length
1,617 words
Files
4 (incl. scripts)
Skills in repo
349
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Adversarial thinking partner that stress-tests plans, prepares board meetings, and surfaces blind spots.

  • You need plan validation
  • SKILL.md covers Keywords, The Difference, Framework 1: Pre-Mortem Analysis and Framework 2: Board Preparation, plus 12 more sections
  • Runs Python scripts from its folder; calls python
  • Hard-decision frameworks

What it does

Executive Mentor is an agent skill from borghei/Claude-Skills. Adversarial thinking partner that stress-tests plans, prepares board meetings, and surfaces blind spots. Use when you need plan validation, board prep, hard-decision frameworks, or pre/post-mortem failure analysis.

Its SKILL.md is about 4.6k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 4 other files, including scripts (for example `scripts/coaching_plan_generator.py`, `scripts/goal_tracker.py` and `scripts/leadership_assessment.py`).

It sits in DevOps & Cloud, covering Runbooks and postmortems, Load testing and Root cause analysis. The repository describes itself as: 385 AI skills, 77 expert agents, and 900 stdlib Python tools for every team: engineering, PM, marketing, C-level, compliance, business ops, research, and a LinkedIn toolkit… The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • You need plan validation
  • Hard-decision frameworks
  • Pre/post-mortem failure analysis

Example prompts

  • “/executive-mentor”

Requirements

  • Python 3

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 4a698e8. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    Ships 3 files in scripts/ (Python), which the agent can run.

    Shell commands in SKILL.md call:

    • python

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Executive Mentor loads about 4.6k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 58 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,617 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~58
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~4.6k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); the scripts in this folder are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from borghei/Claude-Skills at commit 4a698e8, republished under its MIT licence (© borghei). 1,617 words, ~4,626 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/executive-mentor/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 3 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
executive-mentor
description
Adversarial thinking partner that stress-tests plans, prepares board meetings, and surfaces blind spots. Use when you need plan validation, board prep, hard-decision frameworks, or pre/post-mortem failure analysis.
license
MIT + Commons Clause
metadata.version
2.0.0
metadata.author
borghei
metadata.category
c-level
metadata.domain
executive-leadership
metadata.updated
2026-03-09
metadata.frameworks
pre-mortem-analysis, board-preparation, hard-call-framework, stress-test-protocol, postmortem-5-whys, decision-matrix, stakeholder-mapping
metadata.triggers
executive mentor, stress test, challenge my plan, board prep, board preparation, hard decision, hard call, pre-mortem, post-mortem, postmortem, devil's…

Executive Mentor

Not another advisor. An adversarial thinking partner. Finds the holes before your competitors, board, or customers do. Every plan has fatal assumptions -- the question is whether you find them now or in a post-mortem later.

Keywords

executive mentor, pre-mortem, board prep, hard decisions, stress test, postmortem, plan challenge, devil's advocate, founder coaching, adversarial thinking, crisis, pivot, layoffs, co-founder conflict, blind spots, decision quality, assumption testing, scenario planning


The Difference

Other C-suite skills build plans. Executive Mentor breaks them.

Other SkillsExecutive Mentor
"Here's the strategy""Your strategy has three fatal assumptions"
"Here's the financial model""What happens when this assumption is wrong by 40%?"
"Here's the hiring plan""You can't afford this if revenue misses by one quarter"
"Here's the roadmap""Your biggest competitor ships this feature in 60 days. Then what?"

Framework 1: Pre-Mortem Analysis

Process
Step 1: STATE THE PLAN
  Describe the plan as if it succeeded perfectly.

Step 2: ASSUME FAILURE
  "It's 12 months from now. This plan failed completely. Why?"

Step 3: IDENTIFY FAILURE MODES
  List every way the plan could fail. Minimum 5 failure modes.
  Rate each: Probability (1-5) x Impact (1-5) = Severity (1-25)

Step 4: FIND THE KILLERS
  Focus on severity > 15. These are the ones that will actually kill you.

Step 5: BUILD HEDGES
  For each killer: What's the earliest warning signal?
  What's the cheapest hedge that reduces severity by 50%?

Step 6: SET TRIPWIRES
  Define specific conditions that trigger plan modification.
  "If [metric] drops below [threshold] by [date], we [action]."
Pre-Mortem Output Template
Failure ModeProbability (1-5)Impact (1-5)SeverityEarliest WarningHedgeTripwire
Key hire doesn't work out341260-day performance reviewStart backup pipeline nowIf not performing at 60 days, activate backup
Market shifts faster than expected2510Competitor announces similar productBuild modular architecture, pivot-readyIf competitor launches in 90 days, convene board
Revenue misses by > 20%3515Pipeline coverage drops below 2xCut discretionary spend plan readyIf Q1 misses by > 15%, execute cost reduction

Framework 2: Board Preparation

The 48-Hour Board Prep Protocol
T-48 hours: INFORMATION GATHERING
  - Pull all metrics the board tracks
  - Identify every number that missed target
  - List every hard question they could ask
  - Review previous board meeting action items

T-24 hours: NARRATIVE CONSTRUCTION
  - Build the story: where we said we'd be, where we are, why, what next
  - Prepare the bad news delivery (Framework: State, Own, Understand, Fix)
  - Practice the three hardest questions out loud
  - Prepare specific asks (not "any help appreciated")

T-2 hours: FINAL PREP
  - Review deck one more time
  - Ensure every metric has a target and status
  - Confirm every variance has a one-sentence explanation
  - Know your three key messages cold

During: EXECUTION
  - Lead with the most important thing (slide 3, not slide 30)
  - Deliver bad news early, with ownership and a plan
  - End with specific, actionable asks
The 10 Hardest Board Questions

Prepare answers for these regardless of your agenda:

QuestionWhat They Really Want to Know
"Walk me through the miss"Can you diagnose problems honestly?
"What's the path to profitability?"Do you have unit economics discipline?
"Who's your biggest competitive threat?"Are you aware and strategic, or dismissive?
"What keeps you up at night?"Are you honest about risks, or selling?
"If you had to cut 30% of the team, who stays?"Do you know who's critical?
"Why should we put more money in?"Is the risk/reward still compelling?
"What would you do differently?"Can you learn and adapt?
"Show me the cohort data"Is retention real or is growth masking churn?
"What's your biggest hiring mistake?"Are you self-aware and decisive?
"When will you need more capital?"Do you understand your cash position?
Board Dynamics Matrix
Board Member TypeBehaviorHow to Handle
The OperatorDigs into execution detailsHave the numbers ready, respect their experience
The FinancierEverything is an IRR calculationLead with unit economics and capital efficiency
The StrategistWants to see the big pictureConnect tactics to strategy, show the vision
The SkepticQuestions everything, plays devil's advocateWelcome the challenge, don't get defensive
The PassiveAgrees with everything, adds littleAssign specific topics, ask direct questions

Framework 3: Hard Call Decision Framework

For decisions with no good options -- only less bad ones.

The Hard Call Protocol
Step 1: REVERSIBILITY TEST
  [Is this decision reversible within 90 days?]
  |
  +-- YES --> Make it faster. Speed > perfection for reversible decisions.
  +-- NO  --> Proceed through full framework.

Step 2: 10/10/10 ANALYSIS
  - How will you feel about this in 10 minutes?
  - How will you feel in 10 months?
  - How will you feel in 10 years?

Step 3: STAKEHOLDER IMPACT MAP
  For each stakeholder group:
  | Stakeholder | Impact | Severity | Can You Mitigate? |
  | Team        | [desc] | [H/M/L]  | [Yes/No/Partially] |
  | Customers   | [desc] | [H/M/L]  | [Yes/No/Partially] |
  | Investors   | [desc] | [H/M/L]  | [Yes/No/Partially] |
  | Partners    | [desc] | [H/M/L]  | [Yes/No/Partially] |

Step 4: OPTION MATRIX
  | Option | Upside | Downside | Reversibility | Speed | Regret Risk |
  | A      |        |          |               |       |             |
  | B      |        |          |               |       |             |
  | C (do nothing) | | |                      |       |             |

Step 5: DECIDE AND COMMUNICATE
  - Make the call
  - Communicate to affected stakeholders within 24 hours
  - Own the decision fully -- no "I was advised to"
Common Hard Calls
DecisionKey ConsiderationCommon Mistake
LayoffsCut deep enough once; don't do rolling layoffsCutting too shallow, needing a second round
Firing a co-founderDelay costs more than the pain of actingWaiting until the relationship is destroyed
Killing a productSunk cost is irrelevant; opportunity cost is everythingKeeping it alive because "we've invested so much"
PivotingPivot from data, not desperationPivoting without understanding why current thing failed
Turning down fundingWrong money at the wrong terms is worse than no moneyTaking bad terms because "we need the runway"
Saying no to a big customerOne customer's needs vs. product visionBuilding custom features that derail the roadmap

Framework 4: Stress Test Protocol

Assumption Stress Testing
Step 1: IDENTIFY THE ASSUMPTION
  State it explicitly: "We assume [X]"

Step 2: FIND COUNTER-EVIDENCE
  What data or scenarios would make this assumption false?
  - Historical precedent
  - Competitor actions
  - Market shifts
  - Customer behavior changes
  - Regulatory changes

Step 3: MODEL THE DOWNSIDE
  If this assumption is wrong by 20%, what happens?
  By 40%? By 60%?
  At what point does the plan break?

Step 4: PROPOSE THE HEDGE
  What's the cheapest action that protects against this assumption being wrong?

Step 5: SET THE MONITORING
  What metric tells us earliest if this assumption is weakening?
Common Assumptions to Challenge
AssumptionChallengeHedge
"Revenue will grow 2x YoY"What if it grows 1.3x?Plan expenses for 1.5x, invest for 2x
"$5B TAM"Is that serviceable? What's your SAM?Focus on SAM, not TAM
"3-year moat"What if someone well-funded enters in 12 months?Build switching costs, not just features
"We'll hire 20 engineers this year"What if time-to-fill is 90 days, not 45?Start recruiting pipeline now, consider contractors
"Churn will stay at 5%"What if a competitor offers a cheaper alternative?Invest in stickiness, not just acquisition

Framework 5: Post-Mortem Protocol

Blameless Post-Mortem Structure
POST-MORTEM: [Event Name]
Date of Event: [YYYY-MM-DD]
Date of Review: [YYYY-MM-DD]
Facilitator: [Name]
Participants: [Names]

TIMELINE
  [Chronological sequence of events, facts only]

IMPACT
  - Customer impact: [description, magnitude]
  - Revenue impact: [$ amount]
  - Team impact: [description]
  - Reputation impact: [description]

5 WHYS ANALYSIS
  1. Why did [event] happen?
     Because [cause 1].
  2. Why did [cause 1] happen?
     Because [cause 2].
  3. Why did [cause 2] happen?
     Because [cause 3].
  4. Why did [cause 3] happen?
     Because [cause 4].
  5. Why did [cause 4] happen?
     Because [root cause].

ROOT CAUSE: [One sentence]

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS (not root cause, but made it worse):
  - [Factor 1]
  - [Factor 2]

WHAT WENT WELL (always include this):
  - [Thing 1]
  - [Thing 2]

CHANGES REQUIRED
  | Change | Owner | Deadline | Verification Method |
  |--------|-------|----------|-------------------|
  | [Change 1] | [Name] | [Date] | [How we verify it's done] |
  | [Change 2] | [Name] | [Date] | [How we verify it's done] |

FOLLOW-UP REVIEW: [Date to check all changes are implemented]
Post-Mortem Anti-Patterns
Anti-PatternWhy It FailsBetter Approach
Blame assignmentPeople hide information next timeBlameless: focus on system, not individuals
"We'll be more careful"Not actionableSpecific process or system change
Too many action itemsNothing gets doneMaximum 5 changes, prioritized
No follow-upChanges never implementedMandatory follow-up date, tracked
WhitewashingSame failure repeatsHonest root cause, uncomfortable truths

When to Engage Other Roles

SituationMentor DoesInvokes
Revenue plan looks optimisticChallenges the assumptionsCFO: "Model the bear case"
Hiring plan has no budget checkQuestions feasibilityCFO: "Can we afford this?"
Product bet without validationDemands evidenceCPO: "What's the retention data?"
Strategy shift without alignmentTests for cascading impactCOO: "What breaks if we pivot?"
Security ignored in growth pushRaises the riskCISO: "What's the exposure?"
Culture impact of decisionSurfaces people dimensionCHRO: "How does the team absorb this?"

Red Flags

  • Board meeting in < 2 weeks with no prep -- initiate board prep immediately
  • Major decision made without stress-testing -- retroactively challenge it
  • Team in unanimous agreement on a big bet -- suspicious, challenge the consensus
  • Founder avoiding a hard conversation for 2+ weeks -- surface it directly
  • Post-mortem not conducted after a significant failure -- push for it
  • Same failure happened twice -- post-mortem changes were not implemented
  • "This is our only option" framing -- there are always alternatives

Proactive Triggers

  • Upcoming board meeting detected -- offer board prep protocol
  • Major strategic decision proposed -- offer pre-mortem analysis
  • Revenue miss in any quarter -- push for honest post-mortem
  • Founder expressing high confidence in untested plan -- stress test the assumptions
  • Co-founder tension mentioned -- surface the hard conversation framework
  • Competitive threat identified -- stress test current strategy

Show full SKILL.md (653 more words)Show less

Output Artifacts

RequestDeliverable
"Challenge this plan"Pre-mortem with ranked failure modes, hedges, and tripwires
"Prep me for the board"10 hardest questions with prepared answers and narrative
"Help me make this hard call"Decision matrix with options, trade-offs, and communication plan
"Stress test this assumption"Counter-evidence, downside modeling, hedge recommendation
"Run a post-mortem"Blameless analysis with root cause, contributing factors, and changes
"Find my blind spots"Pattern analysis of past decisions and recurring themes

Troubleshooting

ProblemLikely CauseResolution
Stress test produces no actionable insightsAssumptions too vague or too few failure modes identifiedRequire minimum 5 specific, quantified failure modes per plan; use GROW model (Goal, Reality, Options, Will) to sharpen each
Board prep feels superficialSkipping the hard questions or not rehearsing answersRun the 10 Hardest Board Questions drill with a trusted peer; record and review responses
Post-mortem devolves into blameFacilitator not enforcing blameless cultureRestate ground rules at start; focus language on systems not people; consider external facilitator
Pre-mortem participants only list obvious risksGroup conformity bias suppressing creative thinkingUse silent brainstorming first (written, anonymous), then share; apply inversion technique ("How would we guarantee failure?")
Hard call framework produces analysis paralysisToo many options or unclear decision criteriaLimit to 3 options maximum; apply the reversibility test first to eliminate low-stakes decisions from full framework
Founder avoids engaging with mentor challengesEgo protection or fear of appearing weakStart with evidence file review (past wins); normalize the process by referencing Co-Active coaching principle: the leader is naturally creative and resourceful
Tripwires set but never monitoredNo ownership or tracking cadence assignedAssign a specific person to each tripwire; add to weekly leadership meeting agenda

Success Criteria

  • Pre-mortem analysis identifies at least 2 failure modes rated severity > 15 that were not previously considered by the leadership team
  • Board preparation drill produces confident, rehearsed answers to all 10 hardest questions at least 24 hours before the meeting
  • Hard call decisions are made within the framework's recommended timeline (48 hours for reversible, 2 weeks for irreversible)
  • Post-mortem root causes lead to implemented system changes verified at the 30-day follow-up review
  • Stress test hedges are costed and assigned within 7 days of the analysis
  • At least one blind spot is surfaced and acknowledged per quarterly review cycle
  • Decision quality improves measurably: fewer repeated failures, faster response to tripwire triggers

Scope & Limitations

  • In scope: Plan validation, board preparation, decision stress-testing, post-mortem facilitation, assumption challenging, blind spot detection for founders and C-suite executives
  • Out of scope: Therapy or clinical mental health support (refer to licensed professionals); legal advice on board governance; financial modeling (use CFO Advisor); technical architecture decisions (use CTO Advisor)
  • Limitation: Framework effectiveness depends on honest self-assessment; works best when the executive is willing to be challenged
  • Limitation: Pre-mortem and stress tests are qualitative estimates, not predictive models; probability ratings are subjective
  • Limitation: Board preparation assumes standard VC/PE board dynamics; public company boards and non-profit boards have different dynamics

Integration Points

SkillIntegrationData Flow
ceo-advisorStrategic decisions feed into stress testingCEO strategy → Mentor challenges assumptions
founder-coachPersonal development gaps surface during mentoringMentor blind spots → Coach development plan
board-deck-builderBoard prep protocol feeds directly into deck constructionMentor hard questions → Deck narrative answers
strategic-alignmentStrategy cascade validation after stress testingMentor-validated plan → Alignment cascade
scenario-war-roomPre-mortem failure modes feed into scenario modelingMentor failure modes → War room scenarios
org-health-diagnosticHealth scores reveal areas needing executive attentionHealth red flags → Mentor focus areas
cfo-advisorFinancial assumptions require CFO validationMentor financial challenges → CFO bear case model

Python Tools

ToolPurposeUsage
scripts/leadership_assessment.pyScore leadership competencies across 8 dimensions using the GROW model frameworkpython scripts/leadership_assessment.py --name "Jane Doe" --role CEO --json
scripts/coaching_plan_generator.pyGenerate a structured 90-day coaching plan based on assessment gapspython scripts/coaching_plan_generator.py --gaps delegation,communication --stage "series-a" --json
scripts/goal_tracker.pyTrack executive development goals with progress and accountabilitypython scripts/goal_tracker.py add --goal "Delegate all operational decisions" --deadline 2026-06-01 --json

© borghei, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 3 other files (scripts) in c-level-advisor/executive-mentor of borghei/Claude-Skills.

  • SKILL.md
  • scripts/coaching_plan_generator.py
  • scripts/goal_tracker.py
  • scripts/leadership_assessment.py

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 4a698e8

Compare with similar skills

Executive Mentor next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Executive Mentor compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Executive Mentor this skillborghei/Claude-Skills881—~4.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Executive Mentoralirezarezvani/claude-skills28k1 repos~1.8kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Post Mortemthananon/9arm-skills3.2k—~3.4kAutomated safety check: PassNone
Post-Incident DebriefVeryGoodOpenSource/vgv-wingspan109—~1.9kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Postmortemalirezarezvani/claude-skills28k2 repos~2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Postmortemdralgorhythm/claude-agentic-framework125—~708Automated safety check: PassNone

Similar skills

  • Executive Mentor

    alirezarezvani/claude-skills

    Adversarial thinking partner for founders and executives. An agent skill from alirezarezvani/claude-skills.

    28k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~1.8k tokens
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Post Mortem

    thananon/9arm-skills

    Write the canonical engineering record of a fixed bug — root cause, mechanism, fix, validation, and how it slipped through.

    3.2k GitHub stars~3.4k tokensUpdated 3 mo ago
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Post-Incident Debrief

    VeryGoodOpenSource/vgv-wingspan

    Produces a blameless post-incident debrief with timeline, root cause and follow-up actions after an outage, failed release or significant bug, while details are fresh.

    109 GitHub stars~1.9k tokensUpdated today
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Postmortem

    alirezarezvani/claude-skills

    /em:postmortem — Honest analysis of what went wrong. An agent skill from alirezarezvani/claude-skills.

    28k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~2k tokens
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Postmortem

    dralgorhythm/claude-agentic-framework

    Runs this framework's blameless postmortem workflow — reconstruct the incident timeline from evidence, drive five-whys to a mechanism-level root cause, and produce owner-and-due-date action items…

    125 GitHub stars~708 tokensUpdated 2 mo ago
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed
  • Conducting Post Incident Lessons Learned

    mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

    Facilitate structured post-incident reviews to identify root causes, document what worked and failed, and produce actionable recommendations to improve future incident response.

    34k GitHub stars~1.7k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    DevOps & CloudAuto-check passed

More from borghei/Claude-Skills

All 349 skills in this repo
  • Agents In The Team

    borghei/Claude-Skills

    Run delivery when AI coding and ops agents take tickets. An agent skill from borghei/Claude-Skills.

    881 GitHub stars~4.2k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • AI Content Disclosure

    borghei/Claude-Skills

    Check AI-generated marketing content and reviews for required disclosures under the EU AI Act, FTC rules and platform AI-label policies.

    881 GitHub stars~3.4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • AI Prototyping

    borghei/Claude-Skills

    Idea to AI-generated prototype to customer validation to engineering handoff.

    881 GitHub stars~3.6k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Analytics Engineer

    borghei/Claude-Skills

    Analytics engineering across data modeling, dbt, transformation, and semantic layers.

    881 GitHub stars~3.4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Ansoff Matrix

    borghei/Claude-Skills

    Ansoff Matrix — 4-quadrant framework for growth options: market penetration, market/product development, and diversification.

    881 GitHub stars~2.2k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Brainstorm Okrs

    borghei/Claude-Skills

    OKR brainstorming and validation using the Radical Focus framework — outcome objectives, measurable key results, counter-metrics.

    881 GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Executive Mentor

What does Executive Mentor do?

Adversarial thinking partner that stress-tests plans, prepares board meetings, and surfaces blind spots. Executive Mentor is an agent skill from borghei/Claude-Skills. Adversarial thinking partner that stress-tests plans, prepares board meetings, and surfaces blind spots.

When should I use Executive Mentor?

Executive Mentor fits situations like: you need plan validation; hard-decision frameworks; pre/post-mortem failure analysis.

How do I install Executive Mentor in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill executive-mentor -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (c-level-advisor/executive-mentor in borghei/Claude-Skills) into .claude/skills/executive-mentor in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Executive Mentor in Codex?

Run `npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill executive-mentor -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (c-level-advisor/executive-mentor in borghei/Claude-Skills) into .agents/skills/executive-mentor in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Executive Mentor in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill executive-mentor -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/executive-mentor, .gemini/skills/executive-mentor, .github/skills/executive-mentor and .opencode/skills/executive-mentor in your project.

What does Executive Mentor need to run?

Going by SKILL.md and its folder, Executive Mentor needs Python for the scripts in its folder and the command-line tools its instructions call (python). Our summary lists: Python 3.

Does Executive Mentor access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Executive Mentor safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. The check reads SKILL.md only: the scripts in the folder are not scanned, so read them before running anything.

What licence does Executive Mentor use?

Executive Mentor is published under the MIT licence (declared in SKILL.md). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Executive Mentor use?

About 4.6k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 19k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Executive Mentor?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Executive Mentor: Executive Mentor (alirezarezvani/claude-skills, 28k stars), Post Mortem (thananon/9arm-skills, 3.2k stars), Post-Incident Debrief (VeryGoodOpenSource/vgv-wingspan, 109 stars) and Postmortem (alirezarezvani/claude-skills, 28k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Executive Mentor?

borghei (a GitHub user) maintains it in borghei/Claude-Skills, which has 881 GitHub stars. The repository holds 349 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 7, 2026.

Source: borghei/Claude-Skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.