Call Summary Skill
Use this skill after a sales call, demo, or discovery session: it pulls the key points from your notes or transcript and gives you a ready-to-send follow-up email. You provide the call content, or it comes from a connected source.
---name: call-summary-skilldescription: Extract action items, key topics, and objections from call notes or transcripts and draft a customer-facing follow-up email. Use after a sales call, demo, or discovery session. Trigger with "summarise this call", "call notes from", "write follow-up for this meeting".---
# Call Summary Skill
Turn call notes or transcripts into actionable intelligence and draft customer-ready follow-up emails. The skill produces call summaries, action-item registers, objection logs, and follow-up drafts. You provide all call content, or it comes from a connected source.
## Where the Data Comes From
| Source | What It Adds || --- | --- || **CRM via MCP** (e.g. HubSpot, Salesforce) | Account context, opportunity stage, known stakeholders, prior call notes || **Call-recording / transcription via MCP** (e.g. Gong) | Raw transcripts, participant lists, timestamps of key moments || **companyRAG collections** | Discovery summaries, competitive profiles, product info for context-aware follow-ups || **File upload (transcripts)** | Transcript or notes files you drop directly into the chat |
> **No connected source?** Paste the transcript or notes in chat or upload the relevant files — the skill works the same way.
## Call-Processing Workflow
```1. INGEST call content | +--> Accept raw transcript, structured notes, or bullet-point recap +--> Identify call type: Discovery / Demo / Negotiation / Check-In / Other +--> Identify participants (from transcript headers, notes, or user input) |2. EXTRACT key topics | +--> Categorize discussion points (see Topic Categorization below) +--> Capture direct quotes that carry weight (decisions, commitments, objections) +--> Note topics raised but not resolved — these become open items |3. IDENTIFY action items | +--> For each commitment or next step mentioned: | Owner (our side / their side / joint) | Action (specific and verifiable) | Deadline (stated or inferred from context) | Priority (blocks deal progression / important / nice-to-have) |4. FLAG objections and concerns | +--> Capture the objection as stated (not paraphrased away) +--> Note whether it was addressed, partially addressed, or left open +--> Record the response given (if any) for consistency in future calls +--> Classify by type (see Objection Classification below) |5. ASSESS deal impact | +--> Did the call advance, stall, or regress the deal? +--> What changed about our understanding of the opportunity? +--> Are there new stakeholders, risks, or timeline shifts? |6. DRAFT follow-up (see Follow-Up Email Framework below) |7. COMPILE output (see Output Templates below)```
## Topic Categorization
Classify each discussion topic to make the summary scannable:
| Category | What It Covers | CRM Relevance || --- | --- | --- || **Requirements** | Stated needs, use cases, evaluation criteria | Update opportunity requirements || **Decision Process** | Timeline, stakeholders involved, approval steps | Update close date, decision map || **Budget / Commercial** | Pricing discussion, budget constraints, ROI expectations | Update deal value, stage || **Technical** | Integration needs, security, compliance, architecture | Log as technical requirements || **Competitive** | Mentions of alternatives, incumbent vendor, evaluation comparison | Update competitive field in CRM || **Relationship** | Rapport signals, internal politics, champion strength indicators | Update stakeholder notes || **Next Steps** | Agreed actions, follow-up meetings, deliverables promised | Create CRM tasks |
## Objection Classification
| Type | Definition | Follow-Up Priority || --- | --- | --- || **Deal-blocking** | Objection that will prevent close if unresolved | Immediate || **Stage-blocking** | Prevents advancement to next stage but not necessarily a deal-killer | High || **Concern** | Expressed worry that needs addressing but is not blocking progress | Medium || **Skepticism** | General doubt about value or approach — needs proof points | Medium || **Clarification** | Misunderstanding or information gap — easily resolved with data | Low |
For each objection, track: stated objection (verbatim or near-verbatim), classification, response given during the call, resolution status (resolved / partially addressed / open), and recommended follow-up action.
## Follow-Up Email Framework
The follow-up email should be sendable with minimal editing. Structure:
### Tone Calibration
| Relationship Stage | Tone | Formality || --- | --- | --- || **First interaction** | Professional, appreciative of time | Formal || **Active evaluation** | Collaborative, momentum-focused | Semi-formal || **Established rapport** | Direct, efficient, partnership tone | Conversational || **Executive audience** | Concise, outcome-focused | Formal |
### Email Structure
```Subject: [Descriptive, action-oriented — never generic like "Meeting follow-up"]
[Opening: 1 sentence — thank + reference a specific moment from the call]
[Summary: 3-5 bullet points of what was discussed — phrased in terms of their priorities and language, not your product features]
[Action Items: clear table or list] - What we committed to doing → by when - What we're asking them to do → by when
[Next Step: specific — date, time, agenda for next interaction]
[Close: 1 sentence — express enthusiasm about the specific outcome discussed, not generic excitement]```
### Follow-Up Quality Checklist
- References something specific from the conversation (proves you listened)- Uses their language and terminology, not internal jargon- Action items have owners and dates- Next step is specific and time-bound- No markdown formatting (plain text or minimal HTML for email clients)- Subject line would make sense in their inbox without additional context- Appropriate length: 150-250 words for standard follow-ups
## Output Template — Call Summary
```# Call Summary: [Meeting Title / Company Name]**Date**: [Call date] | **Duration**: [Actual length]**Call Type**: [Discovery / Demo / Negotiation / Check-In]**Participants**: [List with roles]
## Key Topics Discussed| # | Topic | Category | Summary ||---|---------|------------|------------------------|| 1 | [Topic] | [Category] | [2-3 sentence summary] || 2 | [Topic] | [Category] | [2-3 sentence summary] |
## Action Items| # | Action | Owner | Deadline | Priority ||----|-------------------|-------|----------|------------------|| 1 | [Specific action] | [Who] | [When] | [Classification] |
## Objections & Concerns| Objection | Type | Status | Follow-Up Needed ||-------------|------------------|------------------|----------------------|| [As stated] | [Classification] | [Open/Addressed] | [Recommended action] |
## Deal Impact Assessment- **Deal Movement**: [Advanced / Stalled / Regressed / Neutral]- **Stage Recommendation**: [Stay / Advance to X / Flag for review]- **New Information**: [What we learned that changes our understanding]- **Risk Changes**: [New risks surfaced or existing risks mitigated]
## Follow-Up Email Draft[Ready-to-send email following the framework above]```
## Processing Notes for Transcript Quality
| Input Quality | Handling || --- | --- || **Full transcript** | Extract verbatim quotes for key moments; comprehensive summary || **Structured notes** | Organize into framework; flag potential gaps in coverage || **Bullet-point recap** | Build summary from bullets; note that nuance may be missing || **Partial / fragmentary** | Summarize what is available; clearly mark sections as "[Incomplete — ask rep to fill gaps]" |
## Guardrails
1. Never fabricate call content. Every topic, quote, and action item must be traceable to the provided notes or transcript. Ambiguous content: "[Unclear from notes — verify with attendees]".2. Never invent attendee reactions. Do not characterise sentiment or buy-in unless explicitly stated in the notes.3. Objection accuracy. Capture objections as close to verbatim as the source allows. Do not soften, reframe, or minimise stated concerns.4. Source labeling. Tag assertions — [From transcript], [From notes], [From user input], [AI interpretation]. AI interpretations must be flagged for verification.
> **Tip:** Ask for DOCX or Markdown output via companyFILES to get a formatted summary ready to share.