skillpacks 0.1.1 → 0.1.2

package/packs/business-growth/claude/metrics/archive/v0.4/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,313 @@
+---
+name: metrics
+description: Define success metrics framework — activation, engagement, retention, growth, and business metrics tied to journey stages
+type: analysis
+version: v0.4
+argument-hint: "[optional: focus area e.g. \"activation\", \"retention\"]"
+interview_depth: full
+visual_tier: visual
+---
+
+## Pack Availability Guard
+
+When recommending a skill from another pack, verify the target pack is installed via `.agents/project.json` `enabled_packs`. If it is not enabled, recommend `/pack install <pack>` inside Claude Code, or `npx skillpacks install <pack>` from the project shell. After install, tell Claude users to run `/reload-skills`, then `/clear` or restart if the skill remains invisible. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+
+# Metrics — Success Metrics Framework
+
+Interview-driven skill that defines measurable success metrics tied to journey stages. Each metric gets a definition, measurement method, target with rationale, and instrumentation requirements.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+- **Hard**: `research/journey-map.md` (or `research/{slug}/journey-map.md` in product-path mode) must exist. If not, tell the user to run `/journey-map` first and stop.
+- **Soft**: Read `research/icp.md` (or `research/{slug}/icp.md`) and `research/customer-feedback.md` (or `research/{slug}/customer-feedback.md`) if they exist — these improve target-setting and relevance.
+
+## Process
+
+### 0. Product-Path Scope Resolution
+
+Resolve research scope by product path before using code or app structure as a hint:
+
+1. If `$ARGUMENTS` names a non-archived `research/{slug}/` directory or a product-path ID whose `scope_path` points there, use that path. Treat `{slug}` as the product/app name, not the ICP, audience, or segment label.
+2. If `$ARGUMENTS` names only `research/_archive/{slug}/` or a manifest entry with `status: archived` or legacy `status: abandoned`, stop and warn that the path is archived; do not write or update scoped outputs there.
+3. Read `research/.progress.yaml` when present. Normalize legacy `active_path` to `active_paths` on read and write back `active_paths` on manifest updates. Treat legacy `abandoned` as `archived`; exclude `archived`, `abandoned`, `deferred`, `revisit_candidate`, `promoted`, and any `scope_path` under `research/_archive/` from active target selection.
+4. If active product paths exist in the manifest, use those paths. If multiple active paths exist, ask which one to target unless this skill explicitly supports cross-path output.
+5. If no active manifest target exists, list non-archived product directories under `research/`, excluding `research/_archive/` and dot directories. Auto-select only when exactly one exists; ask when multiple exist.
+6. If no product directories exist, use flat `research/` single-product mode.
+7. Detect monorepo/app/package structure only as a secondary hint. Suggest creating a missing `research/{slug}/` product path when code clearly exposes an app, but do not require code or monorepo detection before using `research/{slug}/`.
+
+When product path `{slug}` is active, read and write research under `research/{slug}/`, specs under `specs/{slug}/`, and treat top-level `research/*.md` files as flat-mode documents or cross-path summaries.
+
+### 1. Product Path Manifest
+
+Read `research/.progress.yaml` when present. Normalize `active_path` (singular legacy) to `active_paths` (plural list) when reading; treat legacy `abandoned` as `archived` and exclude archived/deferred/revisit/promoted paths plus `research/_archive/` scopes from active target selection. Scope the metrics framework to the active product path by default. When defining metrics that would only be relevant to a deferred product path, note the finding in a `## Product Path Implications` section.
+
+### 2. Load Context
+
+- Read `research/journey-map.md` (or `research/{slug}/journey-map.md`) — customer journey stages, aha moment, habit loop, churn triggers, critical moments
+- Read `research/icp.md` (or `research/{slug}/icp.md`) if it exists — ICP segments, pain points, value props
+- Read `research/customer-feedback.md` (or `research/{slug}/customer-feedback.md`) if it exists — real user behavior patterns, validated/invalidated assumptions
+- Read CLAUDE.md and README if they exist — product context and tech stack (affects instrumentation)
+- Read key source files if a codebase exists — understand what can actually be measured today
+
+### 3. Interview
+
+Use the AskUserQuestion tool. Ask 1–3 focused questions per turn.
+
+**Research and recommend by default.** For each decision point, use web search, upstream research docs (`research/*.md`), and codebase analysis to gather evidence before asking the user. Present your findings with data, state your recommendation with reasoning, and ask the user to approve, adjust, or override. Only ask the user to choose without a recommendation when the decision genuinely requires insider knowledge they haven't shared (internal constraints, personal preferences, strategic bets).
+
+Cover these metric categories (skip or abbreviate areas the user has already addressed in `$ARGUMENTS`):
+
+#### A. Activation Metrics
+Tied to the **aha moment** from the journey map.
+- What specific action signals that a user "gets it"? (the aha moment)
+- How quickly should this happen after signup? (time-to-value target)
+- What's the activation rate target? (% of signups who reach aha)
+- Can this be measured today, or does instrumentation need to be built?
+
+#### B. Engagement Metrics
+Tied to the **habit loop** from the journey map.
+- What does a "healthy" usage pattern look like? (daily/weekly/monthly, duration, depth)
+- What's the core action that engaged users do repeatedly?
+- What frequency indicates strong engagement vs. at-risk?
+- Are there different engagement patterns by user profile?
+
+#### C. Retention Metrics
+Tied to **churn triggers** from the journey map.
+- What defines retention? (still active after 7/30/90 days? Still paying?)
+- What are the leading indicators of churn? (from journey map churn triggers)
+- What's the target retention rate? By what timeframe?
+- What's the current retention baseline (if any data exists)?
+
+#### D. Growth Metrics
+Tied to **expansion and advocacy** from the journey map.
+- How do new users discover the product? (from journey map discovery channels)
+- Is there a viral loop? What's the viral coefficient target?
+- What expansion metrics matter? (seats added, usage increased, tier upgraded)
+- What's the target growth rate? (week-over-week, month-over-month)
+
+#### E. Business Metrics
+Revenue, unit economics, sustainability.
+- What's the revenue model? (from GTM if it exists, otherwise ask)
+- What's the CAC target? (customer acquisition cost)
+- What's the LTV target? (lifetime value)
+- What's the LTV:CAC ratio target?
+- What's the payback period target?
+
+### 4. Present Findings & Validate
+
+**Present the complete metrics framework to the user before writing.** Summarise:
+1. Overview — the 5-8 key metrics and how they connect to journey stages
+2. Each metric with definition, target (citing rationale: benchmarks, journey data, or ICP signals that informed the target), and measurement method
+3. Instrumentation gaps — what can't be measured today
+4. The "North Star" metric — the single metric that best captures overall health, with evidence for why this metric was chosen over alternatives
+
+Use AskUserQuestion to ask:
+- "Does this metrics framework capture what success looks like? Any metrics missing or targets off?"
+
+Continue until the user confirms. Only then proceed to writing.
+
+### 5. Populate Next Steps
+
+Before writing, check which files exist to populate the `## Next Steps` section contextually. Include a **Recommended** item (the single highest-impact next step given current project state) with a one-line reason, followed by **Other options** (2-4 alternatives). Choose the recommendation by the first matching condition:
+
+Use this format in the output:
+
+```markdown
+## Next Steps
+
+**Recommended:** [recommended skill] — [one-line reason grounded in this metrics framework]
+
+Other options:
+- [2-4 applicable alternatives]
+```
+
+- IF instrumentation gaps and no specs for them: `/roadmap` — Sequence instrumentation for the top metric gap into the roadmap
+- IF no `tasks/roadmap.md`: `/roadmap` — Plan the build with instrumentation phases
+- IF no `research/gtm.md`: `/gtm` — Build a GTM plan — metrics define what launch success looks like
+- IF `tasks/roadmap.md` exists: `/exec` — Start building and instrumenting
+- IF product is live and no `research/customer-feedback.md`: `/customer-feedback` — Collect data to validate metric targets
+- IF product is live and real data exists: `/cohort-review` — Analyze actual performance against these targets
+- IF a baseline measurement depends on future production data or aggregate access and is not a launch gate: add it to `tasks/record-todo.md`, not `tasks/todo.md` or `tasks/manual-todo.md`
+
+**Impact-aware adjustments:**
+- IF downstream impact is **Major**: prepend `/reconcile-research — [N] conflicts found in downstream docs` as the first item
+- IF downstream impact is **Minor**: annotate relevant skill suggestions with "(stale — [brief description])"
+- If downstream impact has not been classified yet, run the downstream impact check against the proposed output before selecting the final recommendation. Do not emit a Minor/Major impact recommendation speculatively.
+
+### 6. Write Output
+
+Only after the user has validated the findings, write the output files.
+
+### 7. Downstream Impact Check
+
+After writing, check for downstream research documents that may be affected by what was just decided. Only check documents that exist on disk.
+
+**Downstream documents to check** (use `{slug}/` prefix when product-path scope is active):
+- `research/monetization.md`
+
+For each existing downstream document:
+1. Read it — focus on `> Based on:` header, `## Summary`, and sections that reference concepts this skill just defined or changed
+2. Identify **specific conflicts**: claims, assumptions, or references that contradict what was just decided. Examples:
+   - Metric targets or definitions referenced in monetization that no longer match
+   - Revenue model assumptions anchored to metrics that changed
+   - Conversion or retention targets that have shifted
+3. Note each conflict: downstream file, section, the stale claim (quote it), and what it should now say
+
+**Classify the impact**:
+- **None**: No downstream documents exist, or no conflicts found. Skip display entirely.
+- **Minor** (1–2 small conflicts): Display conflicts to user inline.
+- **Major** (3+ conflicts OR a foundational assumption changed — e.g., North Star metric changed, activation definition redefined, retention targets shifted significantly): Display conflicts and strongly recommend `/reconcile-research`.
+
+Display to the user after showing the written file confirmation. This should be quick — one read per downstream doc, scan for conflicts against key decisions. Not a deep reconciliation.
+
+## Output
+
+### `research/metrics.md` (or `research/{slug}/metrics.md`)
+
+```markdown
+# Success Metrics Framework
+
+> Based on: research/journey-map.md (or research/{slug}/journey-map.md)[, research/icp.md, research/customer-feedback.md]
+> Date: [current date]
+
+## Summary
+[2-3 sentences: the North Star metric, key health indicators, and biggest instrumentation gap]
+
+## North Star Metric
+**Metric**: [name]
+**Definition**: [precise definition]
+**Why this metric**: [how it captures overall product health]
+**Target**: [specific number with timeframe]
+**Current**: [baseline if known, or "not yet measured"]
+
+## Activation
+
+### [Metric Name]
+**Definition**: [precise, unambiguous definition]
+**Journey tie-in**: [which journey stage/moment this measures — reference journey-map.md]
+**Measurement**: [how to measure — event, query, or manual process]
+**Target**: [specific number] — [rationale for this target]
+**Instrumentation**: [what needs to exist to measure this]
+**Status**: [measurable today / needs instrumentation / needs design]
+
+[Repeat for each activation metric]
+
+## Engagement
+
+### [Metric Name]
+**Definition**: [precise definition]
+**Journey tie-in**: [which habit loop or core action this tracks]
+**Measurement**: [how to measure]
+**Target**: [specific number] — [rationale]
+**Instrumentation**: [what's needed]
+**Status**: [measurable / needs work]
+
+[Repeat for each engagement metric]
+
+## Retention
+
+### [Metric Name]
+**Definition**: [precise definition]
+**Journey tie-in**: [which churn trigger this monitors]
+**Measurement**: [how to measure]
+**Target**: [specific number] — [rationale]
+**Instrumentation**: [what's needed]
+**Status**: [measurable / needs work]
+
+[Repeat for each retention metric]
+
+## Growth
+
+### [Metric Name]
+**Definition**: [precise definition]
+**Journey tie-in**: [which expansion/advocacy path this tracks]
+**Measurement**: [how to measure]
+**Target**: [specific number] — [rationale]
+**Instrumentation**: [what's needed]
+**Status**: [measurable / needs work]
+
+## Business
+
+### [Metric Name]
+**Definition**: [precise definition]
+**Measurement**: [how to measure]
+**Target**: [specific number] — [rationale]
+**Status**: [measurable / needs work]
+
+[Repeat for each business metric]
+
+## Instrumentation Gaps
+
+| Metric | What's Missing | Effort | Priority |
+|--------|---------------|--------|----------|
+| [metric] | [what needs to be built] | S/M/L | [High/Med/Low] |
+
+_Start with:_ `/roadmap` — Sequence instrumentation for the top metric gap into the roadmap.
+
+## Metric Dependencies
+[How metrics relate to each other — e.g., activation drives retention, retention drives LTV. Identify which metrics are leading vs. lagging indicators.]
+
+<!-- Only include this section when downstream impact is Minor or Major. Omit entirely for None. -->
+## Downstream Impact
+
+> Checked: [list of downstream docs checked]
+> Impact: Minor | Major
+
+### Conflicts Found
+
+1. **research/[file].md** — [Section Name]
+   - **Stale**: "[exact quote from downstream doc]"
+   - **Now**: [what this skill's output says instead]
+
+[For Major only:]
+> **Recommended action**: Run `/reconcile-research` to audit and fix all affected downstream documents.
+
+## Next Steps
+
+**Recommended:** [recommended next step] — [one-line reason grounded in this artifact]
+
+Other options:
+- [conditional items from step 4 — only include items whose conditions are met]
+```
+
+### `research/metrics-interview.md` (or `research/{slug}/metrics-interview.md`)
+Raw interview log — questions, options presented, user responses, and a closing summary of key decisions.
+
+Create the `research/` directory if it doesn't exist.
+
+## Task Classification
+
+When this skill produces follow-up work, file it by execution semantics:
+
+- Immediately actionable implementation or documentation work goes in `tasks/todo.md`.
+- Human-only external actions tied to automated steps go in `tasks/manual-todo.md` with `_(blocks: Step N.X)_` or `_(after: Step N.X)_`; repo edits, SDK wiring, generated assets, local commands, tests, audits, and authenticated CLI/API work stay in `tasks/todo.md`.
+- One-time condition-gated records, baselines, or future measurements go in `tasks/record-todo.md` with source, condition, non-blocking reason, evidence, and promotion rule.
+- Cadence-based reviews, playtests, adoption checks, investor updates, retros, or docs-health checks go in `tasks/recurring-todo.md` with cadence, owner/agent, next due, evidence path, and escalation conditions.
+- Do not put non-blocking records or recurring obligations in `tasks/todo.md` unless they have been explicitly promoted into current execution work.
+
+## Constraints
+
+- **Requires journey map.** Metrics must be tied to actual journey stages, not abstract business goals.
+- **Be precise.** "User engagement" is not a metric. "Weekly active users who complete at least 3 [core action] per week" is.
+- **Include instrumentation.** Every metric must specify how to measure it and whether that measurement exists today.
+- **Present before writing.** Never write output files until the framework has been presented and validated.
+- **Tie to journey stages.** Every non-business metric must reference a specific stage or moment from the journey map.
+- **Do not overwrite existing `research/metrics.md`** (or `research/{slug}/metrics.md`) without asking the user first.
+
+## Interview Protocol
+
+**Step 1 — Gather context.** Read `.agents/project.json`, README, CLAUDE.md, existing research and specs, git history, and any argument-provided context. Build an internal evidence base before asking questions.
+
+**Step 2 — Assumptions manifest.** Present 3–7 assumptions about the user's situation, goals, and constraints. Tag each with source (`[from prompt]`, `[from repo]`, `[from research]`, `[inferred]`). Ask the user to confirm, correct, or flag before proceeding.
+
+**Step 3 — Focused interview.** Ask 1–3 questions per turn via `AskUserQuestion`. Research and recommend by default — present options with a recommended default. Continue until all areas are covered or the user signals enough.
+
+**Step 4 — Coverage checkpoint.** Present a summary of everything established. Ask the user to confirm completeness before building the alignment page.
+
+## Alignment Page
+
+When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page following `ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md` in this skill's directory. Output: `alignment/metrics-{topic}.html`.
+
+## Default Shipping Contract
+
+Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.

package/packs/business-growth/claude/monetization/ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md

@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports,
 
 The tier is set per skill via `visual_tier` in SKILL.md frontmatter (or detected by the upgrade script). The bundled ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md receives tier-appropriate rendering guidance from the generator.
 
+**Context intake.** This skill declares `context_intake: deep` (Deep interview). Gather repo/project context before asking, present an assumptions manifest when the contract requires it, ask focused questions, and confirm coverage before building review artifacts.
+
 **Alignment lifecycle.** Alignment pages have three lifecycle states. `review` is the draft/pre-approval page: it contains the complete deliverable preview, evidence, required inline gate questions, section feedback controls, local section-feedback YAML only after a section feedback choice is selected, and one bottom `Compile Responses` control. `confirmed` is the post-approval page after the agent has consumed final compiled response YAML, made any approved user-requested edits, and written or updated the approved canonical artifacts. A confirmed page is finished and current for the completed alignment cycle, but it remains amendable when later research changes or extends the conclusions. `amended` is a future revision of a confirmed page: archive the previous confirmed page first, mark what changed, preserve the prior approval record, and highlight the new evidence, decisions, or scope that changed the earlier conclusion.
 
 **Central alignment index.** When a research-producing skill writes or updates an HTML alignment page, also maintain the repository's central alignment index. Look for `alignment/index.html` at the repository root; if the target repo documents a different central alignment-index path, use that path and report it. If the index does not exist, create it as a self-contained HTML page that works from `file://`, links to every active `alignment/*.html` page except itself, and includes the newly written page. Every index entry must include the page's alignment date in a muted meta span after the link, formatted `YYYY-MM-DD`, for example `<a href="page.html">Title</a> <span class="meta">2026-06-09</span>`. The alignment date is the review or confirmed date written inside the page itself; new pages use today's date. If the index exists, update it instead of blindly appending: preserve valid existing entries, metadata, and entry dates; remove duplicate entries for the same page path; keep links repo-relative; and include the new or updated page. When updating an existing index, add a date only to entries that are missing one, deriving it from the page's internal alignment date, or from file history when the page has no internal date. If a `new` marker is used, combine it with the date as `<span class="meta">new · YYYY-MM-DD</span>`, and remove stale `new` markers from entries that are no longer the latest addition.
@@ -57,7 +59,9 @@ The tier is set per skill via `visual_tier` in SKILL.md frontmatter (or detected
 
 **Report-only research gates.** For report-only or pre-approval research skills, the first `review` alignment page must explicitly contain proposed research scope, source plan, assumptions/confidence, recommended output path, proposed file changes, and approval gates before synthesized research begins and before any working packet, canonical research, spec, or task file is created or updated.
 
-**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-monetization-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-monetization-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+**Staged research workflow.** Heavy report-first research uses a scope-first three-stage approval workflow. Stage 1 is minimal scope discovery only: inspect enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, research-scope approval gates, and a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that shows the future Stage 2 review shape before research starts. Stop for final compiled response YAML approval of the research scope. Do not synthesize findings, rank candidates, recommend a path, or create working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. Stage 2 starts only after final compiled response YAML approves the research scope with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet. Flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-monetization-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-monetization-research.md`. Existing raw evidence or search-log outputs may remain as supporting evidence when the skill contract already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the same `review` alignment page so it renders the complete working-packet substance as structured HTML review UI: purpose-built sections, tables, matrices, gates, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams that preserve every packet section, finding, caveat, and decision detail without summary loss. Raw Markdown packet text may appear only as a supplemental source view after the rendered review UI; do not make a `Full Preliminary Packet` or `Full Working Packet` raw Markdown dump, giant `<pre><code>` block, link-only view, or source-only view the primary review surface. Include the evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Partial compiled responses revise the working packet and review page, then remain in Stage 2. Stage 3 consumes final compiled response YAML for artifact approval only when it has `approval_status: ready-for-agent-review` and no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths, and convert the page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
+
+**Stage 2 review-page template.** Stage 1 scope-review pages must include a `Stage 2 Preview / Expected Review Format` section that previews the exact section sequence, table shapes, evidence treatment, visual density, and approval gates the user will see after research; make it specific enough for the user to flag preferred content formats, grouping, labels, visuals, and evidence density before the agent does heavy research. After scope approval and research, the Stage 2 review page must include these sections as structured HTML, not as raw Markdown dumps: `Research Scope Approved` status block with approved scope, source plan, output paths, and unresolved caveats; `Executive Findings` or a skill-specific top-findings section with confidence labels; `Evidence Matrix` mapping claim, evidence/source/path, inference, confidence, assumptions, and decision impact; `Working Packet Review` with the complete working-packet substance rendered as purpose-built HTML sections, lists, tables, matrices, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams; `Alternatives / Rejected or Lower-Confidence Findings`; `Source Coverage & Gaps`; `Assumptions / Confidence Register`; `Proposed Canonical Artifacts & File Changes`; a required `User Format Preferences` gate asking whether the layout, tables, grouping, visuals, labels, and evidence density match expectations; and a required `Final Artifact Approval` gate for Stage 3 readiness. Raw Markdown packet text, search logs, or source notes may appear only as supplemental source views after the rendered review UI and never replace the Stage 2 review sections.
 
 **Research-pack translation.** For business, devtool, game, creator, and media research packs, render the claim/evidence/inference/assumption/decision-impact structure, source coverage categories appropriate to the domain, lower-confidence findings, and downstream implications before asking for approval or routing to the next skill.
 

package/packs/business-growth/claude/monetization/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,13 @@
 # Changelog
 
+## v0.12 - 2026-06-12
+
+- Clarified staged research review pages must render complete working-packet substance as structured HTML UI, with raw Markdown packet text allowed only as a supplemental source view.
+
+## v0.11 - 2026-06-12
+
+- Standardized active pack and skill install guidance on `npx skillpacks install <pack-or-skill>` instead of agent-native `/pack install` or `$pack install` recommendations.
+
 ## v0.10 - 2026-06-10
 
 - Added npm-aware install-route guidance to the Pack Availability Guard while preserving the runner-specific `/pack install <pack>` route.

package/packs/business-growth/claude/monetization/SKILL.md

@@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
 name: monetization
 description: Research-driven monetization strategy — revenue models, pricing architecture, unit economics, and packaging grounded in ICP and competitive data
 type: research
-version: v0.10
+version: v0.12
 argument-hint: "[optional: focus area e.g. \"pricing tiers\", \"usage-based\", \"freemium\"]"
-interview_depth: full
+context_intake: deep
 visual_tier: visual
 ---
 
 ## Pack Availability Guard
 
-When recommending a skill from another pack, verify the target pack is installed via `.agents/project.json` `enabled_packs`. If it is not enabled, recommend `/pack install <pack>` inside Claude Code, or `npx skillpacks install <pack>` from the project shell. After install, tell Claude users to run `/reload-skills`, then `/clear` or restart if the skill remains invisible. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
+When recommending a skill from another pack, verify the target pack is installed via `.agents/project.json` `enabled_packs`. If it is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install <pack>` from the project shell. After install, tell Claude users to run `/reload-skills`, then `/clear` or restart if the skill remains invisible. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.
 
 # Monetization — Revenue & Pricing Strategy
 
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstre
 Use this staged workflow for synthesized research or report outputs that would create or update canonical research, spec, or task files.
 
 1. **Stage 1 - Scope discovery and approval.** Inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the `review` HTML alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled YAML approval of the research scope. Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1.
-2. **Stage 2 - Research and artifact review.** Only after approved research-scope YAML with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback, perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`. Replace `<skill>` with this skill's `name` value. Raw evidence or search logs may remain as supporting evidence where this skill already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the `review` HTML alignment page with the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML. Feedback-only YAML revises the working packet and page, then remains in Stage 2.
+2. **Stage 2 - Research and artifact review.** Only after approved research-scope YAML with no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback, perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode uses `research/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`; product-path mode uses `research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md`. Replace `<skill>` with this skill's `name` value. Raw evidence or search logs may remain as supporting evidence where this skill already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update the `review` HTML alignment page so it renders the complete working-packet substance as structured HTML review UI: purpose-built sections, tables, matrices, gates, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams that preserve every packet section, finding, caveat, and decision detail without summary loss. Raw Markdown packet text may appear only as a supplemental source view after the rendered review UI; do not make a `Full Preliminary Packet` or `Full Working Packet` raw Markdown dump, giant `<pre><code>` block, link-only view, or source-only view the primary review surface. Include the evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML. Feedback-only YAML revises the working packet and page, then remains in Stage 2.
 3. **Stage 3 - Finalize approved artifacts.** Consume final compiled YAML for artifact approval only when it has no unresolved `needs-clarification`, unresolved `down` feedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>`, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths below, and convert the alignment page to `confirmed` with the approval record preserved.
 
 Canonical output paths remain unchanged. Search logs and other supporting evidence remain allowed only where this skill's output contract already requires them.
@@ -184,10 +184,10 @@ Check which files exist to populate the `## Next Steps` section contextually. In
 - IF no `research/gtm.md`: `/gtm` — Build go-to-market plan with pricing from this strategy
 - IF `research/gtm.md` exists but predates this analysis: `/gtm` — Update GTM with refined pricing strategy
 - IF no `research/metrics.md`: `/metrics` — Define metrics to track monetization health (conversion, expansion, churn)
-- IF no `research/journey-map.md`: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `customer-lifecycle` — if `customer-lifecycle` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install customer-lifecycle` first; if `customer-lifecycle` is enabled, recommend `/journey-map` — Map the journey to validate where pricing gates belong
-- IF `specs/` exist and no `tasks/roadmap.md`: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `agent-work-admin` — if `agent-work-admin` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install agent-work-admin` first; if `agent-work-admin` is enabled, recommend `/roadmap` — Plan the build with monetization milestones
-- IF codebase exists: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `business-ops` — if `business-ops` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install business-ops` first; if `business-ops` is enabled, recommend `/mvp-gap` — Check if the product delivers enough value to charge
-- IF product is live and revenue exists: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `business-ops` — if `business-ops` is not enabled, recommend `/pack install business-ops` first; if `business-ops` is enabled, recommend `/runway-model` — Track actual financial performance against these estimates
+- IF no `research/journey-map.md`: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `customer-lifecycle` — if `customer-lifecycle` is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install customer-lifecycle` first; if `customer-lifecycle` is enabled, recommend `/journey-map` — Map the journey to validate where pricing gates belong
+- IF `specs/` exist and no `tasks/roadmap.md`: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `agent-work-admin` — if `agent-work-admin` is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install agent-work-admin` first; if `agent-work-admin` is enabled, recommend `/roadmap` — Plan the build with monetization milestones
+- IF codebase exists: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `business-ops` — if `business-ops` is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install business-ops` first; if `business-ops` is enabled, recommend `/mvp-gap` — Check if the product delivers enough value to charge
+- IF product is live and revenue exists: check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs` for `business-ops` — if `business-ops` is not enabled, recommend `npx skillpacks install business-ops` first; if `business-ops` is enabled, recommend `/runway-model` — Track actual financial performance against these estimates
 
 ### 9. Final Review & Write