collaboration-contract

Collaboration Contract Skill

Cross-team projects fail at the seams: each team runs on its own invisible rules ([working-agreements](../working-agreements/SKILL.md) are per-team; the seam has none), decision rights are assumed differently ("we thought design signed off; they thought we did"), and handoffs bounce because "done" meant different things. The collaboration contract is the seam's rulebook, one page, agreed at kickoff while everyone still likes each other: who decides what (the decision-rights table), how work crosses the boundary (the interface), how the teams talk (channel + cadence), and what done means per handoff — cheap to write on day one, expensive to reverse-engineer during the first fight.

What This Skill Produces

• The decision-rights table — the project's likely decisions × who decides / who's consulted, the ambiguous ones forced now
• The interface spec — how work moves between teams: the handoff format, the request path, the done-definition per handoff type
• The communication layer — the shared channel, the sync cadence (as light as the project allows), the escalation path with names
• The friction protocol — what happens at the first collision: the two-lead conversation before anything ascends

Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:

• The project and the teams — what's being built/done, which teams, their prior history (a scarred partnership needs the contract more and trusts it less — the tone adjusts)
• The likely decisions — the calls this project will force (scope, priority conflicts, quality bars, launch timing); the table pre-decides the deciders, and the awkward ones ("who wins when priorities conflict?") are exactly the ones to force now
• The handoff shapes — what actually crosses the seam (designs → build? data → analysis? approvals?); each shape gets its done-definition
• The leads — the two humans who own the seam; the contract is theirs to sign and theirs to enforce

Framework: The Contract Rules

1. Force the ambiguous decisions now: the table lists the project's foreseeable calls with a decider each — and the ones both teams assume they own are the ones the kickoff must settle ("tie-breaks on priority: [name]"). Every ambiguity left standing is a scheduled fight with interest.
2. Interfaces are formats plus done-definitions: each handoff type gets its shape ("designs arrive as [format] with states covered; 'done' = the checklist passes") — because bounced handoffs are almost always definition mismatches, not quality failures. The [runbook-writer](../runbook-writer/SKILL.md) verify-per-step logic, applied to seams.
3. Cadence as light as survivable: one shared channel, one short sync at the necessary frequency (not the reassuring one — [meeting-cost-meter](../meeting-cost-meter/SKILL.md) math doubles across two teams), and the asks flowing per [async-update-format](../async-update-format/SKILL.md) shapes between syncs. The contract names it all so nobody invents parallel channels in week two.
4. The friction protocol de-escalates by design: first collision → the two leads talk within 48h, before either escalates upward ("no surprising each other's managers" is the clause that saves partnerships) → unresolved after a real attempt → the named tie-breaker. Written while calm, the protocol converts the first fight from a relationship event into a process event.
5. The contract is one page and revisited once: kickoff-signed, then reviewed at the first milestone ("which clause did we violate? fix it or change it" — the working-agreements revisit logic) — a living page, not a treaty. Longer contracts don't get read; unrevisited ones drift into fiction exactly when needed.

Output Format

Collaboration Contract: [project] — [team A] × [team B]

Decision Rights

| Decision | Decides | Consulted | Notes |

|---|---|---|---|

[The forced-ambiguity rows marked ✓ settled]

Interfaces

[Per handoff type: format · done-definition · the request path]

Communication

[The channel · the sync (cadence + length) · between-syncs format · escalation names]

Friction Protocol

[48h two-lead talk first · no-surprise-escalation clause · the tie-breaker · milestone review date]

Quality Checks

• [ ] The both-teams-assume-they-own decisions were forced and settled
• [ ] Every handoff type carries a done-definition
• [ ] The cadence is justified by need, not reassurance
• [ ] The no-surprise-escalation clause is explicit with the 48h talk first
• [ ] The milestone review is dated

Anti-Patterns

• [ ] Do not skip the contract because the teams get along — the contract is why they'll keep getting along
• [ ] Do not leave "who wins priority conflicts" unassigned — that's the fight, pre-scheduled
• [ ] Do not accept vibe-based done — bounced handoffs are definition gaps wearing quality-complaint costumes
• [ ] Do not escalate surprises — the 48h clause is the partnership's real load-bearing wall
• [ ] Do not write three pages — one page gets signed and remembered; three get filed and violated