@event4u/agent-config 2.6.1 → 2.8.0

package/.agent-src/skills/fundraising-narrative/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,189 @@
+---
+name: fundraising-narrative
+description: "Use when shaping a capital-raise pitch — why-now / why-us / why-this framing, market-size reasoning, traction-story construction. Triggers on 'tighten the pitch', 'why-now is weak'."
+status: active
+tier: senior
+source: package
+domain: product
+context_spine: [product, customer-segment]
+---
+
+# fundraising-narrative
+
+## When to use
+
+- A founder is preparing a capital-raise pitch and the why-now is borrowed from a deck template instead of earned from the segment-shift the team actually rides.
+- A deck is landing as "interesting but not now" with investors and the team needs to diagnose whether the gap is *why-now*, *why-us*, or *why-this*.
+- A traction story is being built from screenshots instead of from a coherent leading-indicator arc that explains why the next stage is reachable.
+
+Do NOT use to manage the investor-CRM pipeline (out of scope), run
+the data-room (out of scope), or draft the internal vision anchor
+the org rallies behind (route to Wing-4 `vision-articulation` — the
+external pitch under capital constraint and the internal anchor
+are siblings, not the same artefact).
+
+## Cognition cluster
+
+- **Mental model 1 — First-principles thinking.** *Why-now* is
+  the load-bearing claim and the one most often borrowed. Build
+  it from the segment-shift up — what changed in the world, the
+  customer, the technology — not from a deck template. See
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 1.
+- **Mental model 9 — Hypothesis-driven development.** A pitch is
+  a falsifiable hypothesis: *if X is true, our round closes.*
+  Name the X. Investors who disagree with the hypothesis are not
+  rejecting taste — they are rejecting the falsifiable claim. See
+  `mental-models.md` § 9.
+- **Mental model 16 — Leading vs. lagging indicators.** Revenue
+  is lagging; activation, retention curve, and qualified-pipeline
+  velocity are leading. The traction story leads with the leading
+  signals; revenue is the receipt, not the argument. See
+  `mental-models.md` § 16.
+- **Mental model 30 — Inversion.** Run the round-failure
+  premortem before the deck locks: *which investor heard what we
+  did not say.* Inversion surfaces the claim the deck assumes the
+  room already shares and probably does not. See
+  `mental-models.md` § 30.
+- **Context-spine — product + customer-segment.** Read **product**
+  for the proofs the traction story can actually back; read
+  **customer-segment** for the TAM/SAM argument that survives a
+  bottom-up scrutiny. See
+  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+
+## Procedure
+
+### Step 0: Inherit the positioning frame and vision anchor
+
+Identify the locked positioning anchors from
+[`positioning-strategy`](../positioning-strategy/SKILL.md) and the internal vision
+anchor from `vision-articulation` if it exists. The fundraising
+narrative is the *external pitch under capital constraint*; it
+inherits the internal frame, it does not re-invent it. A pitch
+that contradicts the internal anchor will fracture on the first
+hire after the round closes.
+
+### Step 1: Analyze the inherited why-now
+
+Read the current why-now claim. Three checks: *is this a market
+shift, a customer shift, or a technology shift?*  *Did the shift
+happen in the last 24 months?*  *Would the segment recognise the
+shift without prompting?* A why-now that fails two of three is
+template-borrowed. Name what the inherited deck is leaning on.
+
+### Step 2: Build why-now from first principles
+
+Strip the inherited claim. Rebuild from the segment-shift up:
+
+- **Market shift.** What changed in the buyer's environment that
+  was not true 24 months ago? (Regulation, budget cycle, channel
+  collapse, competitive exit.)
+- **Customer shift.** What changed in how the ICP measures the
+  problem? (New KPI, new buying committee, new procurement gate.)
+- **Technology shift.** What is feasible now that was not? (Cost
+  curve, model capability, infrastructure unlock.)
+
+Pick the *one* shift the segment would name without prompting.
+That is the why-now spine. The others are supporting context.
+
+### Step 3: Construct why-us under capital constraint
+
+Why-us is *unfair advantage under the next 18 months of capital*,
+not credentials. Three anchors:
+
+- **Earned access.** The audience the team can already reach that
+  the next funded peer cannot.
+- **Earned proof.** The reference customer or load-bearing
+  retention curve the team owns now.
+- **Capital fit.** What the round buys that competitors cannot buy
+  in the same window. *"More engineers"* is not capital fit;
+  *"distribution lead-time the round protects"* is.
+
+### Step 4: Build the traction story from leading indicators
+
+Order the traction story leading-first:
+
+1. **Activation curve.** Time-to-first-value trend across cohorts.
+2. **Retention curve.** Cohort retention at the load-bearing
+   milestone, ideally non-trivial — not week 1.
+3. **Pipeline velocity.** Qualified-pipeline movement, not raw
+   pipeline volume.
+4. **Revenue.** The receipt, last in the sequence — not first.
+
+A traction story that opens on revenue assumes the room already
+believes the leading signals; the deck must earn that belief.
+
+### Step 5: Validate against the round-failure premortem
+
+Validate the narrative on three checks:
+
+1. **Premortem coverage.** Run *"the round did not close because…"*
+   with five failure modes. Verify the deck explicitly neutralises
+   the top three or accepts-with-mitigation; unnamed failure modes
+   are silent rejection routes.
+2. **Falsifiable hypothesis.** Confirm the pitch is the form
+   *"if X, then our round closes."* A pitch that cannot be
+   disagreed with is also a pitch that cannot be agreed with.
+3. **Internal-external consistency.** Diff the external pitch
+   against the internal vision anchor. Contradictions kill the
+   first post-round hire round; name them now.
+
+### Step 6: Hand back
+
+Hand the artefacts to the founder for delivery, to
+`messaging-architecture` for the post-round message-stack refresh
+(why-now often shifts the primary message), and to
+`vision-articulation` (Wing-4) for the internal-anchor diff if
+contradictions surfaced.
+
+## Related Skills
+
+**WHEN to use this**
+
+- The unit of work is the why-now / why-us / why-this triad under capital constraint, not a single deck slide.
+- A diagnosed pitch gap needs a structured rebuild, not slide-polish.
+- The traction story is being built screenshot-first; reorder it leading-first.
+
+**WHEN NOT to use this**
+
+- Internal vision-anchor authoring for org alignment — route to Wing-4 `vision-articulation`.
+- Message-stack work post-round — route to [`messaging-architecture`](../messaging-architecture/SKILL.md).
+- Positioning the category and segment — route to [`positioning-strategy`](../positioning-strategy/SKILL.md) first.
+- Investor-CRM pipeline or data-room operations — out of scope.
+
+## When the agent should load this
+
+- "Tighten the why-now for the seed round."
+- "Bau mir die Traction-Story für den Pitch."
+- "Investors keep saying 'interesting but not now' — diagnose."
+- "Run the round-failure premortem on the deck."
+- "Why-us reads as a credentials list — rebuild under capital constraint."
+
+## Output
+
+1. **`why-now-spine.md`** — the one market / customer / technology shift the segment names without prompting, with the 24-month evidence trail.
+2. **`why-us-anchors.md`** — earned-access · earned-proof · capital-fit, each with a load-bearing artefact citation.
+3. **`traction-arc.md`** — activation → retention → pipeline-velocity → revenue, leading-first ordering with the leading-indicator threshold per step.
+4. **`round-failure-premortem.md`** — five failure modes with neutraliser-or-accept verdict, internal-external consistency diff appended.
+
+## Gotcha
+
+- Why-now is the most-borrowed claim in pitches because it is the hardest to earn from first principles — the room can tell.
+- Capital-fit collapses to *"hire more"* when the team has not thought through what the round protects from competitors; protect-language is the discipline.
+- Internal-external contradictions read as charm in the room and as betrayal at the post-round all-hands.
+
+## Do NOT
+
+- Do NOT carry the internal vision anchor verbatim into the pitch — internal anchor is rally; external pitch is hypothesis under capital constraint.
+- Do NOT lead the traction story with revenue when the leading signals are the actual argument.
+- Do NOT make the why-now a template-shaped *"AI changes everything"* — the segment will know.
+- Do NOT manage CRM or data-room operations from this skill; out of scope.
+
+## Runnable example
+
+Mid-market HR analytics tool raising Series A, positioning locked (retention beats acquisition):
+
+- Why-now spine — *customer shift*: HR directors now own a board-quarter retention KPI (was true on 30 % of ICP boards 24 months ago, now 70 %; verified via 14 ICP board-decks reviewed).
+- Why-us anchors — *earned access*: 200-strong HR-director community already engaged. *Earned proof*: cohort-retention curve at week-12 holding at 78 % across 9 design-partner cohorts. *Capital-fit*: round protects 18 months of distribution lead-time before two funded peers reach the same segment.
+- Traction arc — activation (time-to-first-cohort-roll-up: 14 → 6 days across last 4 cohorts) → retention (78 % week-12 cohort) → pipeline-velocity (qualified-pipeline movement at 2.4× quarter-on-quarter) → revenue (the receipt).
+- Round-failure premortem — top three failure modes neutralised in deck; one accepted-with-mitigation (we are pre-revenue at enterprise tier — mitigated by 3 named pilot LOIs).
+- Hand-off → founder for delivery; `messaging-architecture` queued for post-round refresh.

package/.agent-src/skills/funnel-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ status: active
 tier: senior
 source: package
 domain: product
+context_spine: [product, customer-segment, funnel-stage]
 ---
 
 # funnel-analysis
@@ -17,6 +18,29 @@ domain: product
 
 Do NOT use for ranking features, valuation, or OKR decomposition (see Related Skills). Funnel analysis is a **diagnostic**, not a roadmap.
 
+## Cognition cluster
+
+- **Mental model 16 — Leading vs. lagging indicators.** Paid is
+  lagging; activation is leading; signup is upstream of both. A
+  funnel decision built on the lagging stage can only confirm the
+  miss; the leading stage names the binding fix. See
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 16.
+- **Mental model 13 — Occam's razor.** When a stage drops, the
+  simpler explanation usually wins: *"acquisition mix shifted"*
+  beats *"users no longer understand the product."* Pick the simpler
+  cause; it changes the move. See `mental-models.md` § 13.
+- **Mental model 3 — Pareto (80/20).** Drops are almost never
+  uniform across segments; ~20 % of the segment × stage cells carry
+  ~80 % of the loss. Segment before treating the average as
+  actionable. See `mental-models.md` § 3.
+- **Context-spine — product + customer-segment + funnel-stage.**
+  Read the **product** slot for what activation can actually mean
+  in-product (the activation event must be shippable), the
+  **customer-segment** slot for which segments' switch-events the
+  funnel is built for, and the **funnel-stage** slot for the
+  position of each stage relative to the buying journey. See
+  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+
 ## Procedure
 
 ### Step 0: Inspect
@@ -40,7 +64,7 @@ Do NOT use for ranking features, valuation, or OKR decomposition (see Related Sk
 
 1. The right benchmark is **your own funnel one quarter ago**, not industry averages. Industry averages mix verticals so coarsely they're useless for action.
 2. For each stage: is current rate within ±2 percentage points of trailing-quarter median? If not, that stage is the primary suspect.
-3. If multiple stages drift simultaneously, the cause is upstream (acquisition mix change, broken instrumentation), not the stage itself.
+3. If multiple stages move off-band simultaneously, the cause is upstream (acquisition mix change, broken instrumentation), not the stage itself.
 
 ### Step 4: Segment the broken stage
 
@@ -98,4 +122,4 @@ Do NOT use for ranking features, valuation, or OKR decomposition (see Related Sk
 
 1. **`funnel-table.md`** — 5-stage funnel with cohort rates, 95% CI, and 12-week trend (sparkline or compact ASCII). One row per cohort week or month.
 2. **`segment-breakdown.md`** — table of the broken stage segmented by channel · device · plan · geo. Rates with CIs. Suspect segments highlighted.
-3. **`hypothesis-list.md`** — top 3 → for the broken segment-stage with cheapest-falsification experiment per cause and an explicit prediction for the next measurement.
+3. **`hypothesis-list.md`** — top 3 causes for the broken segment-stage with cheapest-falsification experiment per cause and an explicit prediction for the next measurement.

package/.agent-src/skills/gtm-launch/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
+---
+name: gtm-launch
+description: "Use when sequencing a launch — alpha / beta / GA waves, audience-by-wave logic, narrative beats per wave, engineering-readiness gates. Triggers on 'plan the launch', 'sequence GA'."
+status: active
+tier: senior
+source: package
+domain: product
+context_spine: [product, customer-segment, channel-stage]
+---
+
+# gtm-launch
+
+## When to use
+
+- A product, feature, or major capability is approaching ship-readiness and the team needs a wave plan (alpha → beta → GA) keyed to audience and proof, not a date on a calendar.
+- A launch is being planned date-first; the team needs to invert and plan readiness-first so an unmet gate stops a wave instead of leaking past it.
+- A previous launch landed soft and the retro names "no audience-by-wave logic" or "narrative beats unclear per wave" as the cause.
+
+Do NOT use to write announcement copy (route to `release-comms`),
+lock the message stack (route to `messaging-architecture`), or plan
+post-launch retention loops (route to `retention-loops`).
+
+## Cognition cluster
+
+- **Mental model 10 — Reversible vs. irreversible decisions.** A GA
+  wave is largely irreversible: rolling back narrative and audience
+  expectations after public launch costs more than re-shipping the
+  product. Alpha and beta are reversible; treat them as the
+  decision-quality buffer. See
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 10.
+- **Mental model 29 — Premortem.** Before the wave plan locks, write
+  the post-mortem of the launch as if it failed. The premortem
+  surfaces the gates that need to hold; the wave plan is the inverse
+  of that list. See `mental-models.md` § 29.
+- **Mental model 16 — Leading vs. lagging indicators.** Engineering-
+  readiness signals (error rate, latency, support-load) are leading;
+  pipeline lift is lagging. A wave plan that gates on lagging signals
+  ships into a soft floor. See `mental-models.md` § 16.
+- **Context-spine — product + customer-segment + channel-stage.**
+  Read the **product** slot for shippable scope, the
+  **customer-segment** slot for who hears the launch on which wave,
+  and the **channel-stage** slot for where each wave's audience lives
+  in the awareness → decision arc. See
+  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+
+## Procedure
+
+### Step 0: Inherit the message stack
+
+Identify the locked `primary-message.md`, `supporting-proofs.md`, and
+`audience-matrix.md` from [`messaging-architecture`](../messaging-architecture/SKILL.md).
+If the stack is missing or unstable, stop and route back. A launch
+plan without a locked message stack ships three different stories at
+three different surfaces.
+
+### Step 1: Run the premortem
+
+Write the launch post-mortem **as if it has already failed**. Three
+prompts: *"what did the segment hear that we did not say,"* *"what
+broke in the first 48 hours,"* *"what did the alternative say first
+and louder."* The premortem produces the failure-mode list the wave
+plan must neutralise.
+
+### Step 2: Define the gates per wave
+
+For each wave (alpha · beta · GA), define **entry gates** and **exit
+gates**:
+
+- *Alpha entry:* engineering-readiness signal threshold (error rate,
+  latency, instrumentation coverage). *Exit:* < N support tickets
+  per 100 sessions on the load-bearing flow.
+- *Beta entry:* alpha exit + audience-matrix proof exists for the
+  beta audience. *Exit:* leading indicator (activation, time-to-
+  first-value) clears threshold per `mental-models.md § 16`.
+- *GA entry:* beta exit + narrative beats locked for the public
+  segment. *Exit:* not applicable — GA is irreversible; the next
+  wave is *post-launch retention*, handed to `retention-loops`.
+
+### Step 3: Sequence the audience waves
+
+Audience waves are not seniority waves. They are **proof waves**.
+Each wave's audience is whichever segment generates the proof the
+*next* wave needs. Order:
+
+1. *Alpha audience* — the segment where the team can sit next to
+   the user. Proof: load-bearing flow does not break under real use.
+2. *Beta audience* — the segment whose adoption is the credibility
+   anchor for GA. Proof: a quotable reference and an activation
+   curve.
+3. *GA audience* — the full ICP segment from the `customer-segment`
+   slot. Proof: pipeline lift, narrative pickup, retention curve.
+
+### Step 4: Assign narrative beats per wave
+
+Each wave gets a narrative beat — the **one** thing the audience
+remembers. Alpha beat = trust signal (we are not winging it). Beta
+beat = proof signal (it works for someone like you). GA beat = the
+primary message from `messaging-architecture` Step 1. Beats stack;
+they do not contradict.
+
+### Step 5: Validate the plan against the premortem
+
+Validate each premortem failure mode against the wave plan: verify a
+specific gate or beat neutralises it. Any failure mode without an
+explicit neutraliser is a known leak — name it, do not bury it.
+Validation passes only when every premortem item is either
+neutralised or accepted-with-mitigation.
+
+### Step 6: Hand back
+
+Hand the artefacts to [`release-comms`](../release-comms/SKILL.md)
+for announcement-surface drafting, to
+[`editorial-calendar`](../editorial-calendar/SKILL.md) for cadence
+mapping, and to [`launch-readiness`](../launch-readiness/SKILL.md)
+for the merge-day checklist.
+
+## Related Skills
+
+**WHEN to use this**
+
+- The unit of work is the wave plan (alpha · beta · GA) with gates and beats, not a single announcement.
+- A launch needs readiness-gated sequencing instead of calendar-driven sequencing.
+- The team can name the message stack but not which audience hears which beat in which wave.
+
+**WHEN NOT to use this**
+
+- Writing the announcement copy or press surface — route to [`release-comms`](../release-comms/SKILL.md).
+- Locking the primary message and proofs — route to [`messaging-architecture`](../messaging-architecture/SKILL.md).
+- Pre-merge ops checklist (rollout, rollback, monitoring) — route to [`launch-readiness`](../launch-readiness/SKILL.md).
+- Post-launch retention design — route to [`retention-loops`](../retention-loops/SKILL.md).
+
+## When the agent should load this
+
+- "Plan the launch waves for the new pricing tier."
+- "Wir starten den GA — gib mir die Alpha-Beta-GA Sequenz."
+- "What are the entry gates for the beta wave?"
+- "Premortem the launch and rebuild the wave plan from the failure list."
+- "Sequence the audience waves around the proof we still need."
+
+## Output
+
+1. **`launch-premortem.md`** — three failure modes per prompt, ranked by carrying cost, each tagged with the wave that owns the neutraliser.
+2. **`wave-plan.md`** — three waves (alpha · beta · GA) with entry / exit gates, audience, leading-indicator threshold per wave.
+3. **`narrative-beats.md`** — one beat per wave (trust → proof → primary-message), with the line the team will not contradict on any surface during that wave.
+
+## Gotcha
+
+- Calendar-driven launches confuse a date with a gate. A date does not signal readiness; a gate does. The wave plan must hold even if the date slips two weeks.
+- "Friends-and-family alpha" is alpha-shaped theatre — it produces the wrong proof for the next wave. Recruit an alpha audience that exposes the load-bearing flow.
+- A premortem that produces only three failure modes was rushed; push for ten and keep the load-bearing three.
+
+## Do NOT
+
+- Do NOT write the announcement copy here — copy lives in `release-comms` downstream of locked beats.
+- Do NOT collapse alpha and beta to save calendar time — alpha and beta produce different proofs.
+- Do NOT lock GA without an explicit retention-loops handoff; an unowned post-launch fortnight is where most launches soften.
+
+## Runnable example
+
+Mid-market HR analytics tool launching workforce-analytics layer:
+
+- Premortem: (a) CFOs hear "another tool" not "retention saving"; (b) HRIS plug-in misconfigured under load; (c) reference customer quote not contractually approved by GA.
+- Wave plan — *Alpha:* 3 design-partner HR directors, gate = HRIS plug-in error-rate < 1 % under load. *Beta:* 10 HR leaders matching ICP, gate = activation curve hits 5 cohort-roll-ups per week. *GA:* full ICP segment, gate = quoted reference contractually approved.
+- Narrative beats — *Alpha:* "we sat next to you while it worked." *Beta:* "an HR director like you saved 7 hours last board-quarter." *GA:* primary message from `messaging-architecture` Step 1.
+- Hand-off → `release-comms` drafts the GA-wave surface; `retention-loops` owns the 30-day post-GA cohort.

package/.agent-src/skills/messaging-architecture/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,184 @@
+---
+name: messaging-architecture
+description: "Use when shaping the primary message, supporting proofs, and audience-by-message matrix from a locked positioning frame — before any copy or launch beat. Triggers on 'tighten the message stack'."
+status: active
+tier: senior
+source: package
+domain: product
+context_spine: [product, customer-segment]
+---
+
+# messaging-architecture
+
+## When to use
+
+- Positioning is locked (four anchors + assumption ledger) and the next artefact — launch deck, homepage, sales narrative — needs a load-bearing message stack instead of one-off copy.
+- A team is shipping copy faster than it is shipping shared meaning; lines diverge across surfaces and the segment cannot recognise itself.
+- An audience-by-message matrix is missing and the same primary message is being shouted at three audiences who hear three different things.
+
+Do NOT use to write the copy itself (downstream of this skill),
+peer-vs-peer comparison (route to `competitive-positioning`), or
+launch sequencing (route to `gtm-launch`).
+
+## Cognition cluster
+
+- **Mental model 15 — Signal vs. noise.** Every message lands inside
+  an inbox that is already full. The primary message must clear the
+  segment's noise floor, not just be true. Estimate the noise before
+  drafting; without it, every line looks distinctive in the doc and
+  forgettable in market. See
+  [`docs/contracts/mental-models.md`](../../../docs/contracts/mental-models.md) § 15.
+- **Mental model 30 — Inversion.** Ask *"what is the strongest
+  message a credible alternative would land against us?"* The answer
+  exposes the proofs the message stack must carry, not the words.
+  See `mental-models.md` § 30.
+- **Context-spine — product + customer-segment.** Read the **product**
+  slot for the proofs the team can actually back; read the
+  **customer-segment** slot for the buyer's listening posture.
+  Architecture that exceeds the proofs available is fiction. See
+  [`context-spine`](../../../docs/contracts/context-spine.md).
+
+## Procedure
+
+### Step 0: Inherit the positioning frame
+
+Open the `positioning.md` artefact ([`positioning-strategy`](../positioning-strategy/SKILL.md)
+Step 1 output). If the four anchors are missing or contested, stop
+and route back. Messaging architecture without a locked positioning
+frame is decoration — it will be rewritten the next quarter.
+
+### Step 1: Identify the primary message
+
+Identify the **one** sentence — the load-bearing claim
+that, if the segment remembered nothing else, would still trigger
+the right switch event. Structure:
+
+*"For \<segment\>, \<category\> that \<load-bearing benefit\>,
+instead of \<alternative\>."*
+
+The benefit must be the **switch-event benefit** — what changes the
+day they buy — not a feature list and not a brand attribute.
+
+### Step 2: Stack the supporting proofs
+
+Three proofs, ranked. Each proof is a sentence the team can defend
+with evidence (data, demo, reference, contract clause). Proofs that
+need adjective amplification (*"truly seamless"*, *"radically
+simple"*) are not proofs — they are the gap a proof would fill.
+
+Rank the proofs by **closing weight**: how much each moves the
+buyer's decision from *no* to *yes*. The order is the order of
+appearance in every downstream surface.
+
+### Step 3: Build the audience-by-message matrix
+
+Audiences are not segments — they are roles inside the segment
+(economic buyer, champion, end-user, finance, security). For each
+audience, fill: **what they fear · what they hope · what proof
+clears each.** The matrix forces the team to confront the surfaces
+where the primary message lands wrong on a role even when right on
+the segment.
+
+### Step 4: Validate against the noise floor and the inversion test
+
+Validate the stack on three checks:
+
+1. **Noise floor.** For the primary message, name three lines a
+   credible peer says today. If the primary message would not be
+   distinguishable when read alongside them, it is below the noise
+   floor — sharpen or drop.
+2. **Inversion.** Write the strongest counter-message a credible
+   alternative would land against us. Confirm at least one supporting
+   proof neutralises it; if none does, the stack is missing a proof.
+3. **Proof-coverage.** For every fear / hope cell in the matrix,
+   verify a proof exists. Cells without a proof are explicit gaps,
+   not silent omissions.
+
+### Step 5: Hand back
+
+Hand the three artefacts (see `## Output`) to
+[`gtm-launch`](../gtm-launch/SKILL.md) for launch-wave sequencing,
+[`editorial-calendar`](../editorial-calendar/SKILL.md) for cadence
+mapping, or [`fundraising-narrative`](../fundraising-narrative/SKILL.md)
+for capital-raising framing. Do **not** write the copy here — copy
+production is a downstream artefact.
+
+## Related Skills
+
+**WHEN to use this**
+
+- The unit of work is the message stack (primary + proofs + matrix), not a copy block.
+- Positioning is locked and downstream surfaces need a shared anchor.
+- Cross-audience messaging has scattered and the team cannot name a primary.
+
+**WHEN NOT to use this**
+
+- Locking the four-anchor positioning frame — route to
+  [`positioning-strategy`](../positioning-strategy/SKILL.md).
+- Peer-vs-peer ours-vs-theirs verdict table — route to
+  [`competitive-positioning`](../competitive-positioning/SKILL.md).
+- Launch-wave audience sequencing — route to
+  [`gtm-launch`](../gtm-launch/SKILL.md).
+- Voice attribute selection or tone-by-context matrix — route to
+  [`voice-and-tone-design`](../voice-and-tone-design/SKILL.md).
+
+## When the agent should load this
+
+- "Lock the message stack before we draft the launch deck."
+- "Wir brauchen eine primary message, keine Tagline."
+- "Build the audience-by-message matrix for the security buyer."
+- "Are our three proofs distinguishable from \<incumbent\>'s lines?"
+- "Inversion-check our messaging against the alternative."
+- "Our message has scattered across landing pages — re-anchor it."
+
+## Output
+
+1. **`primary-message.md`** — one sentence in the segment / category
+   / benefit / alternative shape, plus the load-bearing word and
+   why it is load-bearing.
+2. **`supporting-proofs.md`** — three proofs ranked by closing
+   weight, each with the evidence the team can defend it with.
+3. **`audience-matrix.md`** — one row per audience: fear · hope ·
+   proof-that-clears-each · primary-message variant if reframing is
+   needed.
+
+## Gotcha
+
+- A primary message everyone in the room agrees with on first read
+  is usually below the noise floor — agreement is consensus, not
+  distinctiveness.
+- Proofs that need adjectives are signals of a missing proof; replace
+  the adjective with the evidence or remove the line.
+- The audience matrix tempts the team to multiply primary messages.
+  Resist: the segment receives one primary; the matrix shapes
+  emphasis, not substitution.
+
+## Do NOT
+
+- Do NOT write copy in this skill — copy lives downstream.
+- Do NOT inflate the stack beyond three proofs; a stack of seven is
+  a wishlist, not architecture.
+- Do NOT skip the noise-floor check; an internally distinctive
+  message is not the same as a market-distinctive one.
+
+## Runnable example
+
+Mid-market HR analytics tool, positioning locked (segment: HR leaders
+at 200–2000-person growing companies; alternative: spreadsheet +
+HRIS report; PoV: retention beats acquisition):
+
+- Primary message: *"For HR leaders at growing 200–2000-person
+  companies, the workforce-analytics layer that turns the
+  board-quarter retention conversation into a one-click roll-up,
+  instead of a spreadsheet rebuild every quarter."*
+- Proofs ranked by closing weight: (1) cohort attrition by tenure
+  band in < 5 clicks (demo); (2) plugs into the existing HRIS,
+  not a replacement (architecture diagram); (3) board-quarter
+  rebuild collapses from \~ 8 hours to \~ 1 hour (reference
+  customer, contractually quoted).
+- Audience matrix — *Champion (HR director):* fear = another tool
+  to maintain; hope = looks competent to CEO; proof = HRIS
+  plug-in. *Economic buyer (CFO / COO):* fear = soft ROI; hope =
+  retention saving; proof = reference quote with hours saved.
+- Hand-off → `gtm-launch` sequences launch waves around the
+  retention-conversation moment in board-quarter cadence.