opencode-skills-collection 4.1.15 → 4.1.17

package/bundled-skills/manifest/SKILL.md

@@ -6,127 +6,34 @@ source: community
 date_added: "2026-02-27"
 ---
 
-# Manifest Setup
+# Manifest setup and verification
 
-Follow these steps **in order**. Do not skip ahead.
+## When to Use
 
-## Use this skill when
+- Configure an explicitly requested Manifest telemetry or gateway integration.
+- Diagnose missing authorized telemetry without changing unrelated provider routing.
 
-- User wants to set up observability or telemetry for their agent
-- User wants to connect their agent to Manifest for monitoring
-- User needs to configure a Manifest API key or custom endpoint
-- User is troubleshooting Manifest plugin connection issues
-- User wants to verify the Manifest plugin is running
+## Availability
 
-## Do not use this skill when
+This AAS tree bundles instructions, not a plugin, CLI or gateway. Identify the actual host, installed versions and current supported Manifest integration from [official documentation](https://manifest.build/llm-gateway/docs/introduction/). The historical `claude gateway` / `claude plugins` commands in earlier copies are not a verified Claude Code setup contract; do not run them or infer a host configuration path.
 
-- User needs general observability design (use `observability-engineer` instead)
-- User wants to build custom dashboards or alerting rules
-- User is not using the Manifest platform
+Telemetry-only setup and routing all inference through a gateway are distinct changes. Use the user's requested scope and preserve existing providers, credentials and other host entries.
 
-## Instructions
+## Procedure
 
-### Step 1 — Stop the gateway
+1. Inspect the current authorized integration and target account/endpoint. Verify available tools or CLI help and the exact package/source version. Back up affected configuration privately before a scoped edit.
+2. Reuse an existing authorized credential through the host's private credential mechanism. If absent, let the user enter it in the service or a supported local secret interface; never ask them to paste a key in chat or put it in shell arguments. A prefix check is not authentication proof.
+3. Establish what data will leave the host: prompts, responses, account identifiers, costs, tool traces and error payloads. Choose actual redaction/retention controls and obtain authorization for private transmission and provider charges. Do not assume metadata-only telemetry when full-body logging is enabled.
+4. Prepare the concrete supported configuration for the selected integration. Use HTTPS for remote endpoints and reject userinfo/unintended redirects; local loopback may be appropriate for a separately reviewed self-hosted service. Change only the authorized entries. Restart only the relevant service when the integration actually requires it; preserve other running tasks.
+5. Send one approved synthetic fixture only if a provider call is authorized. Verify the exact request/trace, returned model or telemetry receipt, charge and secret-redacted logs at both ends. A startup log or three-second wait alone does not prove delivery. An unavailable authentication or provider check remains unverified.
+6. Return the changed configuration path, backup, observed receipt and remaining limitations. Verify the rollback/disable path; do not disable a competing diagnostic plugin merely because its name looks similar.
 
-Stop the gateway first to avoid hot-reload issues during configuration.
+## Example
 
-```bash
-claude gateway stop
-```
-
-### Step 2 — Install the plugin
-
-```bash
-claude plugins install manifest
-```
-
-If it fails, check that the CLI is installed and available in the PATH.
-
-### Step 3 — Get an API key
-
-Ask the user:
-
-> To connect your agent, you need a Manifest API key. Here's how to get one:
->
-> 1. Go to **https://app.manifest.build** and create an account (or sign in)
-> 2. Once logged in, click **"Connect Agent"** to create a new agent
-> 3. Copy the API key that starts with `mnfst_`
-> 4. Paste it here
-
-Wait for a key starting with `mnfst_`. If the key doesn't match, tell the user the format looks incorrect and ask them to try again.
-
-### Step 4 — Configure the plugin
-
-```bash
-claude config set plugins.entries.manifest.config.apiKey "USER_API_KEY"
-```
-
-Replace `USER_API_KEY` with the actual key the user provided.
-
-Ask the user if they have a custom endpoint. If not, the default (`https://app.manifest.build/api/v1/otlp`) is used automatically. If they do:
-
-```bash
-claude config set plugins.entries.manifest.config.endpoint "USER_ENDPOINT"
-```
-
-### Step 5 — Start the gateway
-
-```bash
-claude gateway install
-```
-
-### Step 6 — Verify
-
-Wait 3 seconds for the gateway to fully start, then check the logs:
-
-```bash
-grep "manifest" ~/.claude/logs/gateway.log | tail -5
-```
-
-Look for:
-
-```
-[manifest] Observability pipeline active
-```
-
-If it appears, tell the user setup is complete. If not, check the error messages and troubleshoot.
-
-## Safety
-
-- Never log or echo the API key in plain text after configuration
-- Verify the key format (`mnfst_` prefix) before writing to config
-
-## Troubleshooting
-
-| Error | Fix |
-|-------|-----|
-| Missing apiKey | Re-run step 4 |
-| Invalid apiKey format | The key must start with `mnfst_` |
-| Connection refused | The endpoint is unreachable. Check the URL or ask if they self-host |
-| Duplicate OTel registration | Disable the conflicting built-in plugin: `claude plugins disable diagnostics-otel` |
-
-## Examples
-
-### Example 1: Basic setup
-
-```
-Use @manifest to set up observability for my agent.
-```
-
-### Example 2: Custom endpoint
-
-```
-Use @manifest to connect my agent to my self-hosted Manifest instance at https://manifest.internal.company.com/api/v1/otlp
-```
-
-## Best Practices
-
-- Always stop the gateway before making configuration changes
-- The default endpoint works for most users — only change it if self-hosting
-- API keys always start with `mnfst_` — any other format is invalid
-- Check gateway logs first when debugging any plugin issue
+The user requests telemetry for an existing local agent. Identify its supported exporter, draft the exact endpoint and private credential mapping, apply the authorized scoped change, and verify one synthetic trace without altering the default model provider. If only a gateway integration is available, explain that difference before making a routing change.
 
 ## Limitations
-- Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
-- Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
-- Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.
+
+- Current Manifest keys, endpoints, plans and integrations can change; use the actual account instructions and official schemas.
+- Gateway fallback or automatic request repair may change provider, data destination, parameters and retry costs; configure them only within the authorized scope.
+- This guide does not prove authentication, production delivery, billing accuracy or privacy merely by being installed.

package/bundled-skills/markdown-rendering/SKILL.md

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ So you get stuck: either a stray extra pane, or a blank viewer after moving it.
 
 ## The Rule
 
-You have exactly two reliable options. **Never `move-surface` a markdown viewer** — that is the path that bugs.
+The contributor observed two workarounds for a particular cmux version. Verify the installed command/version; the blank-render issue may have changed. Prefer reopening an owned viewer without altering unrelated panes.
 
 ### Option A — Open it right on the first try
 
@@ -61,10 +61,10 @@ cmux markdown open /abs/path/file.md --direction right --focus false
 
 - **Never `move-surface` a markdown viewer.** It renders blank afterward. This is the core bug this skill exists for.
 - Open it correctly the first time (Option A), OR close the conflicting right pane(s) and open a fresh right pane from scratch (Option B).
-- Only close panes that are unused or irrelevant — never close a pane the user is working in.
+- Close only surfaces created for this task or explicitly authorized for closure; apparent irrelevance does not prove they contain no unsaved work.
 - Always anchor to `$CMUX_WORKSPACE_ID`; never assume the visually focused workspace.
 - Pass `--focus false` so you don't steal the user's focus.
-- You can't screenshot/read a markdown surface to verify it. If unsure it rendered, ask the user.
+- Use any supported readback/rendered inspection available on the actual host. If it cannot inspect the viewer, report that limit instead of claiming success.
 
 ## Limitations
 

package/bundled-skills/market-sizing-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Comprehensive market sizing methodologies for calculating Total Addressable Mark
 - Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs.
 - Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes.
 - Provide actionable steps and verification.
-- If detailed examples are required, open `resources/implementation-playbook.md`.
+- Use the examples below; no separate implementation playbook is bundled.
 
 ## Overview
 
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ Build market size from customer segment calculations.
 **Formula:**
 ```
 TAM = Σ (Segment Size × Annual Revenue per Customer)
-SAM = TAM × (Segments You Can Serve / Total Segments)
+SAM = Σ (Eligible Customer Count in Each Served Segment × Annual Revenue per Customer in That Segment)
 SOM = SAM × Realistic Penetration Rate (Year 3-5)
 ```
 
@@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ SOM (Year 5) = SAM × 5%
 Cross-check using multiple methods.
 
 **Validation Techniques:**
-1. Compare top-down and bottom-up results (should be within 30%)
+1. Compare top-down and bottom-up definitions, units, populations and source dates; investigate divergence rather than applying an arbitrary percentage gate
 2. Check against public company revenues in space
 3. Validate customer count assumptions
 4. Sense-check pricing assumptions
@@ -271,10 +271,10 @@ Cross-check using multiple methods.
 6. Compare to similar market categories
 
 **Red Flags:**
-- TAM that's too small (< $1B for VC-backed startups)
+- Opportunity size that does not support the stated business model or investor constraints
 - TAM that's too large (unsupported by data)
-- SOM that's too aggressive (> 10% in 5 years for new entrant)
-- Inconsistency between methodologies (> 50% difference)
+- SOM unsupported by the actual acquisition capacity, competition and retention assumptions
+- Unexplained inconsistency in populations, units or assumptions between methodologies
 
 ## Industry-Specific Considerations
 
@@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ TAM = Total Category GMV × Expected Take Rate
 
 **TAM Calculation:**
 ```
-TAM = Total Users × ARPU × Purchase Frequency per Year
+TAM = Total Potential Buyers × Average Revenue per Purchase × Purchases per Buyer per Year
 ```
 
 ### B2B Services
@@ -388,23 +388,12 @@ TAM = Total Target Companies × Average Deal Size × Deals per Year
 - Consider competitive intensity
 - Factor in switching costs and barriers
 
-## Additional Resources
+## Local Resources
 
-### Reference Files
+- [Data source checklist](references/data-sources.md): discovery starting points; verify current availability, price and source dates before use.
+- [Illustrative SaaS calculation](examples/saas-market-sizing.md): a worked example, not current market evidence.
 
-For detailed methodologies and frameworks:
-- **`references/methodology-deep-dive.md`** - Comprehensive guide to each methodology with step-by-step worksheets
-- **`references/data-sources.md`** - Curated list of market research sources, databases, and tools
-- **`references/industry-templates.md`** - Specific templates for SaaS, marketplace, consumer, B2B, and fintech markets
-
-### Example Files
-
-Working examples with complete calculations:
-- **`examples/saas-market-sizing.md`** - Complete TAM/SAM/SOM for a B2B SaaS product
-- **`examples/marketplace-sizing.md`** - Marketplace platform market opportunity calculation
-- **`examples/value-theory-example.md`** - Value-based market sizing for disruptive innovation
-
-Use these examples as templates for your own market sizing analysis. Each includes real numbers, data sources, and assumptions documented clearly.
+No other templates or implementation playbook are bundled. Percentages in this guide are scenario assumptions, not universal market-share benchmarks. Do not purchase reports or transmit customer data without authorization.
 
 ## Quick Start
 
@@ -415,12 +404,12 @@ To perform market sizing analysis:
 3. **Gather data** - Industry reports, customer data, competitive intelligence
 4. **Calculate TAM** - Apply methodology formula
 5. **Narrow to SAM** - Apply product, geographic, segment filters
-6. **Estimate SOM** - 2-5% realistic capture rate
+6. **Estimate SOM** - Model acquisition, retention, capacity and competition; use a percentage only as an explicitly justified scenario assumption.
 7. **Validate** - Cross-check with alternative methods
 8. **Document** - Show methodology, sources, assumptions
 9. **Present** - Structure for audience (investors, strategy, operations)
 
-For detailed step-by-step guidance on each methodology, reference the files in `references/` directory. For complete worked examples, see `examples/` directory.
+Use the two bundled resources above and cite current primary evidence for the actual market.
 
 ## Limitations
 - Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.

package/bundled-skills/market-sizing-analysis/examples/saas-market-sizing.md

@@ -1,349 +1,32 @@
-# SaaS Market Sizing Example: AI-Powered Email Marketing for E-Commerce
+# Illustrative SaaS market sizing
 
-Complete TAM/SAM/SOM calculation for a B2B SaaS startup using bottom-up and top-down methodologies.
+All customer counts, prices, filters and capture rates below are hypothetical inputs. They are not Gartner statistics, verified company revenue, market shares or investment evidence. Replace each assumption with a dated primary source or documented customer research before using the model for a real decision.
 
-## Company Overview
+## Bottom-up calculation
 
-**Product:** AI-powered email marketing automation platform
-**Target:** E-commerce companies with $1M+ annual revenue
-**Geography:** North America (initial), global expansion planned
-**Pricing:** $500/month average (scales by email volume)
-**Timeline:** 3-5 year market opportunity
+| Segment | Customers | Annual contract value | Annual revenue pool |
+| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: |
+| Small | 85,000 | $3,600 | $306,000,000 |
+| Mid-market | 18,000 | $9,600 | $172,800,000 |
+| Enterprise | 2,500 | $24,000 | $60,000,000 |
+| Total | 105,500 | — | $538,800,000 |
 
-## Methodology 1: Bottom-Up Analysis (Primary)
+The hypothetical North American TAM is $538.8 million. Applying a 45% product-fit filter and then a conditional 70% switching-addressability filter gives:
 
-### Step 1: Define Target Customer Segments
-
-**Segment Criteria:**
-- E-commerce companies (D2C and marketplace sellers)
-- $1M+ in annual revenue
-- North America based
-- Currently using email marketing
-
-**Segment Breakdown:**
-
-| Segment | Annual Revenue | Count | ACV | Priority |
-|---------|---------------|-------|-----|----------|
-| Small E-commerce | $1M-$5M | 85,000 | $3,600 | High |
-| Mid-Market E-commerce | $5M-$50M | 18,000 | $9,600 | High |
-| Enterprise E-commerce | $50M+ | 2,500 | $24,000 | Medium |
-
-**Data Sources:**
-- U.S. Census Bureau: E-commerce business counts
-- Shopify, BigCommerce, WooCommerce: Published merchant counts
-- Statista: E-commerce market statistics
-- LinkedIn Sales Navigator: Company search validation
-
-### Step 2: Calculate TAM (Total Addressable Market)
-
-**Formula:**
-```
-TAM = Σ (Segment Count × Annual Contract Value)
-```
-
-**Calculation:**
-```
-Small E-commerce:   85,000 × $3,600  = $306M
-Mid-Market:         18,000 × $9,600  = $173M
-Enterprise:          2,500 × $24,000 = $60M
-                                      --------
-TAM (North America):                  $539M
-```
-
-**Global Expansion Multiplier:**
-- North America = 35% of global e-commerce market
-- Global TAM = $539M / 0.35 = $1.54B
-
-**TAM = $1.54B globally, $539M North America**
-
-### Step 3: Calculate SAM (Serviceable Available Market)
-
-**Filters Applied:**
-
-1. **Geographic Filter: North America Only (Year 1-2)**
-   - Base TAM: $539M
-   - Filter: 100% (starting in North America)
-   - Result: $539M
-
-2. **Product Capability Filter: AI-Ready Customers**
-   - Customers ready to adopt AI email marketing
-   - Excludes: Companies with basic email needs only
-   - Filter: 45% (based on survey data)
-   - Result: $539M × 0.45 = $242M
-
-3. **Current Tool Filter: Addressable Switching Market**
-   - Customers using incumbent tools who would switch
-   - Excludes: Recently switched, custom built solutions
-   - Filter: 70% (typical B2B SaaS switching market)
-   - Result: $242M × 0.70 = $169M
-
-**SAM = $169M**
-
-**SAM Breakdown by Segment:**
-```
-Small E-commerce:   $306M × 0.45 × 0.70 = $96M (57%)
-Mid-Market:         $173M × 0.45 × 0.70 = $54M (32%)
-Enterprise:         $60M × 0.45 × 0.70  = $19M (11%)
-```
-
-### Step 4: Calculate SOM (Serviceable Obtainable Market)
-
-**Market Share Assumptions:**
-
-**Year 3 Target: 2.5% of SAM**
-- Typical new entrant market share
-- Requires strong product-market fit
-- Assumes $10M in funding for GTM
-
-**Year 5 Target: 5% of SAM**
-- Achievable with scale and brand
-- Requires effective sales and marketing
-- Assumes additional funding for growth
-
-**Calculation:**
-```
-SOM (Year 3) = $169M × 2.5% = $4.2M ARR
-SOM (Year 5) = $169M × 5.0% = $8.5M ARR
-```
-
-**SOM by Segment (Year 5):**
-```
-Small E-commerce:   $96M × 5% = $4.8M ARR (565 customers)
-Mid-Market:         $54M × 5% = $2.7M ARR (281 customers)
-Enterprise:         $19M × 5% = $1.0M ARR (42 customers)
-                                --------
-Total:                          $8.5M ARR (888 customers)
-```
-
-### Bottom-Up Summary
-
-| Metric | North America | Notes |
-|--------|---------------|-------|
-| **TAM** | $539M | All e-commerce $1M+ revenue |
-| **SAM** | $169M | AI-ready, addressable switching market |
-| **SOM (Year 3)** | $4.2M | 2.5% market share, 495 customers |
-| **SOM (Year 5)** | $8.5M | 5% market share, 888 customers |
-
-## Methodology 2: Top-Down Analysis (Validation)
-
-### Step 1: Identify Total Market Category
-
-**Market Category:** Email Marketing Software
-**Source:** Gartner Market Share Report (2024)
-
-**Global Email Marketing Software Market:**
-- Market Size: $7.5B (2024)
-- Growth Rate: 12% CAGR
-- Geography: Worldwide
-
-**Data Source:** Gartner, "Market Share: Email Marketing Software, Worldwide, 2024"
-
-### Step 2: Apply Geographic Filter
-
-**North America Market Share:**
-- North America = 40% of global software spending
-- Email Marketing NA = $7.5B × 0.40 = $3.0B
-
-### Step 3: Apply Segment Filters
-
-**E-Commerce Focus:**
-- E-commerce email marketing = 25% of total email marketing
-- E-commerce segment = $3.0B × 0.25 = $750M
-
-**$1M+ Revenue Filter:**
-- Companies with $1M+ revenue = 65% of e-commerce market
-- TAM = $750M × 0.65 = $488M
-
-**AI-Powered Subset:**
-- AI-powered email marketing = 35% of market (growing rapidly)
-- SAM = $488M × 0.35 = $171M
-
-### Top-Down Summary
-
-| Metric | Amount | Calculation |
-|--------|--------|-------------|
-| **TAM** | $488M | NA e-commerce email marketing $1M+ |
-| **SAM** | $171M | AI-powered subset |
-
-## Triangulation and Validation
-
-### Comparing Methodologies
-
-| Metric | Bottom-Up | Top-Down | Variance |
-|--------|-----------|----------|----------|
-| **TAM** | $539M | $488M | +10% |
-| **SAM** | $169M | $171M | -1% |
-
-**Validation Result:** ✅ Excellent alignment (< 2% variance on SAM)
-
-**Why alignment matters:**
-- Bottom-up and top-down within 10% gives high confidence
-- SAM alignment of 1% is exceptional
-- Use bottom-up as primary (more granular)
-- Reference top-down for validation
-
-### Public Company Validation
-
-**Klaviyo (Public, KVYO):**
-- 2024 Revenue: ~$700M
-- Focus: E-commerce email/SMS marketing
-- Market Share: ~46% of our SAM
-- Validates large e-commerce email market exists
-
-**Mailchimp (Intuit-owned):**
-- 2024 Revenue: ~$800M (estimated)
-- Broader focus, includes SMBs
-- Significant e-commerce customer base
-
-**Validation:** Market leaders have $700M-$800M revenue, supporting $1.5B+ global TAM
-
-### Sanity Checks
-
-**Customer Count Check:**
-✅ 888 customers at Year 5 (5% market share) = reasonable
-✅ Implies ~14,000 total addressable customers
-✅ Aligns with estimated 105,000 e-commerce cos $1M+ in NA
-
-**Average Revenue Check:**
-✅ $8.5M ARR / 888 customers = $9,571 ACV
-✅ Within expected range of $3.6K-$24K by segment
-✅ Weighted average makes sense given segment mix
-
-**Market Share Check:**
-✅ 5% market share in Year 5 is achievable for well-funded startup
-✅ Lower than Klaviyo (46%), appropriate for new entrant
-✅ Room for growth beyond Year 5
-
-## Growth Projections
-
-### Market Growth Assumptions
-
-**Email Marketing Market CAGR: 12%**
-- Source: Gartner market forecast
-- Drivers: E-commerce growth, marketing automation adoption
-
-**AI Subset Growth: 25% CAGR**
-- Higher than overall market
-- AI adoption accelerating in marketing
-- More companies seeking AI-powered tools
-
-### SAM Evolution (5-Year Forecast)
-
-| Year | SAM | Growth | Notes |
-|------|-----|--------|-------|
-| 2026 | $169M | - | Starting point |
-| 2027 | $211M | +25% | AI adoption accelerating |
-| 2028 | $264M | +25% | Mainstream adoption begins |
-| 2029 | $330M | +25% | AI becomes table stakes |
-| 2030 | $413M | +25% | Market maturity |
-
-**Growing SAM Impact:**
-- Year 5 SOM of 5% applied to $413M SAM = $20.6M potential
-- Provides headroom for growth
-- Supports expansion beyond initial 5% share
-
-## Competitive Context
-
-### Market Share Distribution
-
-**Current Leaders:**
-- Klaviyo: ~46% share
-- Mailchimp: ~35% share
-- Others: ~19% share (fragmented)
-
-**Market Dynamics:**
-- Two dominant players
-- Long tail of smaller competitors
-- Opportunity in AI-differentiated positioning
-- Typical SaaS market consolidation pattern
-
-**Implications for SOM:**
-- 5% share requires strong differentiation
-- AI capabilities could drive 10-15% share long-term
-- Acquisition potential if unable to reach scale
-
-## Investment Thesis Validation
-
-### Market Opportunity Score: ✅ Strong
-
-**Positives:**
-✅ Large market: $1.5B+ global TAM
-✅ Growing market: 12% CAGR, 25% for AI subset
-✅ Addressable: $169M SAM with clear path to customers
-✅ Achievable: $8.5M Year 5 ARR reasonable
-✅ Validation: Public companies prove market exists
-
-**Risks:**
-⚠️ Competition: Klaviyo and Mailchimp are strong
-⚠️ Switching costs: Customers invested in current tools
-⚠️ Market share: 5% requires excellent execution
-
-**Verdict:** Market opportunity supports venture-scale outcome ($100M+ exit possible)
-
-## Presentation to Investors
-
-### Slide 1: Market Opportunity Summary
-
-```
-AI-Powered Email Marketing for E-Commerce
-
-TAM: $1.5B Global, $539M North America
-SAM: $169M (AI-ready e-commerce companies)
-SOM: $8.5M ARR by Year 5 (5% market share)
-
-Market Growing 25% CAGR (AI subset)
-Validated by Klaviyo ($700M revenue)
-```
-
-### Slide 2: Bottom-Up Validation
-
-```
-Target: 105,000 E-Commerce Companies ($1M+ revenue)
-
-Segment Breakdown:
-• Small ($1M-$5M): 85,000 companies × $3,600 ACV
-• Mid-Market ($5M-$50M): 18,000 × $9,600
-• Enterprise ($50M+): 2,500 × $24,000
-
-Year 5: 888 customers, $8.5M ARR (5% market share)
-```
-
-### Slide 3: Market Validation
-
-```
-Top-Down: $171M SAM (Gartner + market filters)
-Bottom-Up: $169M SAM (<2% variance)
-
-Public Company Validation:
-• Klaviyo: $700M revenue (46% market share)
-• Mailchimp: $800M revenue (Intuit-owned)
-
-Demonstrates large, proven market
+```text
+SAM = 538800000 * 0.45 * 0.70 = 169722000
+Year-3 SOM scenario = SAM * 0.025 = 4243050
+Year-5 SOM scenario = SAM * 0.05 = 8486100
 ```
 
-## Key Takeaways
+The 70% filter applies only within the already filtered population; multiplying correlated independent-looking percentages without evidence can double count exclusions. A capture percentage is an assumption, not an execution plan or a validated forecast.
 
-**Market Sizing Results:**
-- TAM: $1.5B globally, $539M North America
-- SAM: $169M (North America, AI-ready customers)
-- SOM: $4.2M (Year 3), $8.5M (Year 5)
+If capture is proportional across all three segments, the Year-5 scenario implies approximately 1,662 customers: `105500 * 0.45 * 0.70 * 0.05`. This count is a scenario expectation and must be rounded only for presentation. Revenue-weighted capture can imply a different customer mix, so do not infer a unique customer count from total ARR alone.
 
-**Methodology:**
-- Bottom-up primary (most granular and credible)
-- Top-down validation (<2% variance on SAM)
-- Public company validation (Klaviyo, Mailchimp)
+## Independent validation
 
-**Investment Implications:**
-- Market supports venture-scale outcome
-- 5% market share achievable with strong execution
-- Growing market (25% CAGR) provides tailwinds
-- Competitive but differentiated positioning possible
+Compare the result with a separately sourced top-down estimate using the same geography, product scope, time period and annual revenue unit. Record disagreements rather than adjusting inputs to force alignment. Total revenue of a multi-product vendor does not establish its share of this narrowly defined SAM.
 
-**Next Steps:**
-1. Validate pricing assumptions with customer research
-2. Refine segment prioritization based on GTM capacity
-3. Update SAM annually as market evolves
-4. Track Klaviyo/Mailchimp as competitive benchmarks
-5. Monitor AI adoption rates in e-commerce segment
+## Evidence register
 
-This bottom-up market sizing provides a defensible, data-driven foundation for business planning and fundraising.
+For every input record its source URL, publication date, definition, uncertainty and adjustments. Keep a conservative/base/upside sensitivity table with explicit assumptions. These scenarios are not statistical percentiles unless a probability model was actually fitted. No report purchase, data export or publication is authorized by this example.