startup-ideation-kit 1.0.0 → 2.0.0

package/skills/sk-niche/SKILL.md

@@ -114,8 +114,8 @@ Confirm the selection: restate each as Person + Problem + Promise.
 
 2. Update `workspace/sessions/{name}/00-session.md`:
    - Change Phase 2 Niche status from `[ ] Not Started` to `[x] Complete`
-   - Set Active Phase to "Phase 3: Offer"
-   - Set Next Recommended to "Phase 3: Offer"
+   - Set Active Phase to "Phase 3: Competitors"
+   - Set Next Recommended to "Phase 3: Competitors"
    - Fill in the "Gold Niche" section with Person / Problem / Promise
 
-3. Tell the user: "Niche phase complete! Your Gold niche is: [Person] who struggle with [Problem] -- you'll deliver [Promise]. When you're ready, run `/sk-offer` to build your Grand Slam Offer around this niche."
+3. Tell the user: "Niche phase complete! Your Gold niche is: [Person] who struggle with [Problem] -- you'll deliver [Promise]. When you're ready, run '/sk-competitors' to research your competitive landscape, or skip to '/sk-offer' to build your Grand Slam Offer directly."

package/skills/sk-offer/SKILL.md

@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
 ---
 name: sk-offer
-description: "Phase 3: Build a Grand Slam Offer. Six P's worksheet + Hormozi Value Equation + offer enhancement (Scarcity/Urgency/Bonuses/Guarantees/Naming)."
+description: "Phase 5: Build a Grand Slam Offer. Six P's worksheet + Hormozi Value Equation + offer enhancement (Scarcity/Urgency/Bonuses/Guarantees/Naming)."
 ---
 
-# Phase 3: Grand Slam Offer Builder
+# Phase 5: Grand Slam Offer Builder
 
 You are the offer architect. Your job is to guide the user through building a Grand Slam Offer -- one so good that people feel stupid saying no. You draw from Alex Hormozi's $100M Offers framework and the Six P's model.
 
@@ -11,7 +11,16 @@ You are the offer architect. Your job is to guide the user through building a Gr
 
 1. Ask the user for their session name.
 2. Read `workspace/sessions/{name}/02-niches.md` and load the **Gold niche** selection.
-3. Confirm the Gold niche with the user before proceeding. If they want to use a different niche, let them choose.
+3. Read `workspace/sessions/{name}/04-positioning.md` if it exists and extract:
+   - The Moore positioning statement
+   - The market category and type
+   - The value themes
+   - The Neumeier Onliness statement
+   - The elevator pitch
+4. Read `workspace/sessions/{name}/03-competitors.md` if it exists and extract:
+   - The pricing landscape summary (market price range, value metric, whitespace)
+   - Top competitor strengths for the Commodity Check
+5. Confirm the Gold niche (and positioning if available) with the user.
 
 ## Step 1: Six P's One-Pager
 
@@ -142,6 +151,6 @@ If commoditized, revisit the offer stack and naming to differentiate. The goal i
 
 ## Save & Next
 
-1. Save the complete offer document to `workspace/sessions/{name}/03-offer.md`.
-2. Update `workspace/sessions/{name}/00-session.md` to mark Phase 3 as complete.
-3. Recommend the user run `/sk-validate` next to plan how to test this offer with real people.
+1. Save the complete offer document to `workspace/sessions/{name}/05-offer.md`.
+2. Update `workspace/sessions/{name}/00-session.md` to mark Phase 5 as complete.
+3. Recommend the user run `/sk-validate` next (Phase 6) to plan how to test this offer with real people.

package/skills/sk-pitch/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,461 @@
+---
+name: sk-pitch
+description: "Phase 10: Build investor-ready pitch scripts in multiple formats (10-min, 5-min, 2-min, 1-min elevator, investor email). Uses all prior session data -- niche, competitors, positioning, offer, validation, money model -- to produce comprehensive pitch narratives with Q&A prep and scoring. Triggers for investor pitch, pitch practice, fundraising deck, demo day prep."
+---
+
+# Startup Pitch
+
+Build investor-ready pitch content in multiple formats. Uses a structured 7-element framework combined with a problem-solution-insight foundation to produce pitch narratives that are clear, compelling, and fundable.
+
+## How It Works
+
+```
+INTAKE → RESEARCH (2 parallel waves) → PITCH CONSTRUCTION → REVIEW & PRACTICE
+```
+
+The process: understand the company deeply, research the investor audience and competitive framing, then construct the pitch. Typical runtime: 15-20 minutes in Claude Code (parallel agents), 30-40 minutes in Claude.ai (sequential).
+
+### Core Philosophy
+
+Three principles govern every output this skill produces:
+
+1. **Clarity over sophistication.** "80% accurate and 100% clear beats the reverse." If a grandmother can't understand what you do, investors won't either. Eliminate jargon, acronyms, and marketing language.
+2. **Lead with what's impressive.** You earn each additional minute of investor attention. Don't bury traction after 5 sections of problem setup — put the strongest signal right after "what you do."
+3. **Make investors talk.** A pitch isn't a monologue. The more investors talk, the more they convince themselves. Structure the narrative to invite conversation, not shut it down.
+
+### Language
+
+Default output language is **English**. If the user writes in another language or explicitly requests one, use that language for all outputs instead.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1: Intake
+
+Short and focused — 1-2 rounds of questions. The goal is enough context to build a compelling pitch.
+
+### Recommended Prior Work
+
+A pitch built on validated data is significantly stronger than one built on self-reported answers. For the best results, complete StartupKit phases 1-9 before running this skill -- they provide niche validation, competitive intelligence, positioning, a Grand Slam Offer, validation results, revenue model, lead strategy, and AI skills integration that become the foundation of a much more credible pitch.
+
+Not required. sk-pitch works standalone. But the quality difference is noticeable.
+
+### Check for Prior StartupKit Session
+
+Before asking questions, ask the user for their session name, then read ALL available session files for comprehensive pitch context:
+
+**From Phase 2 (Niche):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/02-niches.md` -- Gold niche (Person, Problem, Promise)
+
+**From Phase 3 (Competitors):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/03-competitors.md` -- Competitive landscape summary
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/03-competitors/battle-cards/` -- Per-competitor battle cards (for Q&A prep)
+
+**From Phase 4 (Positioning):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/04-positioning.md` -- Positioning summary with elevator pitch
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/04-positioning/positioning-statement.md` -- Full statement formats
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/04-positioning/messaging-implications.md` -- Messaging hierarchy
+
+**From Phase 5 (Offer):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/05-offer.md` -- Grand Slam Offer details (product, price, value equation)
+
+**From Phase 6 (Validation):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/06-validation.md` -- Validation results (traction proxy, unfair advantages)
+
+**From Phase 7 (Money):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/07-money-model.md` -- Revenue model, projections, customer journey
+
+**From Phase 8 (Leads):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/08-lead-strategy.md` -- GTM strategy, channels, 4 Pillars scores
+
+**From Phase 9 (Skills):**
+- `workspace/sessions/{name}/09-skills-match.md` -- AI skills integration plan
+
+For any files that don't exist, note the gap and proceed with what's available. Not every session completes all phases before pitching.
+
+### Data Mapping from StartupKit
+
+| Pitch Element | Primary Source | Fallback |
+|---|---|---|
+| What You Do | `04-positioning.md` Elevator Pitch | `02-niches.md` Promise |
+| Problem | `02-niches.md` Gold Niche Problem | Ask founder |
+| Solution | `05-offer.md` Product/Plan sections | Ask founder |
+| Unique Insight | `04-positioning.md` Value Themes | Ask founder |
+| Traction | `06-validation.md` Milestones achieved | Ask founder |
+| Business Model | `07-money-model.md` Core Pricing Math | `05-offer.md` Price |
+| Market Size | `03-competitors.md` Market data | Research in Wave 2 |
+| Team | Always ask (not in prior phases) | Required |
+| The Ask | Always ask (not in prior phases) | Required |
+| Competitive Frame | `03-competitors/battle-cards/*.md` | Research in Wave 2 |
+| Positioning | `04-positioning.md` Moore Statement | Research in Wave 1 |
+| Revenue Projections | `07-money-model.md` Growth Scenario | Ask founder |
+
+Tell the user what data was found: "I found data from [X] prior phases. Here's what I'll use for the pitch: [summary]. I still need to ask about your team and fundraising ask."
+
+Always ask these pitch-specific questions regardless of prior data:
+- Who is the target audience for this pitch? (VCs, angels, accelerator, demo day, specific fund?)
+- What formats do you need? (10-min, 5-min, 2-min, 1-min, email, all?)
+- Who's on the team? (names, roles, key accomplishments -- be specific)
+- How much are you raising and what will you do with it? (amount, milestones, timeframe)
+
+### What to Ask (if no prior data exists)
+
+**Round 1 — The essentials (all required for a pitch):**
+- What does your company do? (2 sentences max — this becomes the opening)
+- What problem are you solving and for whom?
+- What's your unique insight? (What do you know that others don't?)
+- What traction do you have? (users, revenue, growth rate — with timeframes). If none: say so honestly, we'll build the pitch around insight and team instead.
+- What's your business model? (one sentence — how do you make money?)
+- Who's on the team? (names, roles, key accomplishments — not titles)
+- How much are you raising and what will you do with it?
+
+**Round 2 — Sharpening (only if needed):**
+- What's your market size? (or enough data to calculate it)
+- Who are your main competitors? What's your advantage?
+- What milestones will you hit in 18-24 months with this funding?
+
+**Pitch-specific questions:**
+- Who is the audience? (VCs, angels, accelerator, demo day, specific fund?)
+- What formats do you need? (10-min narrative, 2-min verbal, email pitch, all of them?)
+
+Don't over-interview. A founder with clear answers to Round 1 has enough to build a strong pitch.
+
+### The 2-Sentence Test
+
+Before moving to research, crystallize the company description into exactly 2 sentences + one specific example. This is the foundation of the entire pitch.
+
+Test: send it to a smart friend — could they paraphrase it back correctly? If not, simplify further.
+
+> **Anti-pattern:** "We leverage AI-powered machine learning to optimize cross-functional synergies in the B2B SaaS vertical."
+> **Better:** "We help sales teams find which leads will actually buy. Our tool analyzes email replies and tells reps exactly who to call next — last month one customer closed 40% more deals."
+
+### Output
+
+Save consolidated context to `workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch.md` for pitch construction.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 1.5: Research Depth Assessment
+
+After intake, assess market complexity and present the Research Depth recommendation to the user.
+
+> **Reference:** Read `references/research-scaling.md` for the complexity scoring matrix, tier definitions, wave configurations, and the user communication template.
+
+### Process
+
+1. Score three factors from the intake: market breadth (1-3), known competitors (1-3), geographic scope (1-3)
+2. Sum the scores (range 3-9) and map to a tier: Light (3-4), Standard (5-7), Deep (8-9)
+3. Present the Research Depth table to the user (see `research-scaling.md` for the exact template)
+4. Wait for user response: **light**, **deep**, or **ok** to accept the recommendation
+5. Record the selected tier
+
+The selected tier determines the number of agents per wave and search rounds per agent in Phase 2. See `research-scaling.md` for exact wave configurations per tier.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2: Research
+
+Two parallel research waves exploring investor audience and competitive/market framing. Together they provide the raw material for a pitch that resonates with the target audience.
+
+### Environment Detection
+
+Check if the `Agent` tool is available:
+
+- **Agent tool available (Claude Code):** Spawn all agents within each wave in parallel. This is faster.
+- **Agent tool NOT available (Claude.ai, web):** Execute research sequentially, following the same templates. Same depth, just slower.
+
+### Web Search
+
+If WebSearch is unavailable, fall back to **Knowledge-Based Mode**: use training data, mark findings with **[Knowledge-Based — verify independently]**, and reduce confidence ratings by one level.
+
+> **Reference:** Read `references/research-principles.md` before starting any wave. It defines source quality tiers, cross-referencing rules, and how to handle data gaps.
+
+### Wave 1: Audience & Narrative Intelligence
+
+> **Reference:** Read `references/research-wave-1-audience-narrative.md` for agent templates.
+
+Two agents (or two sequential blocks):
+
+**A1: Investor & Audience Intelligence** — Research the target audience (VC firms, angels, accelerators). What are they investing in? What thesis do they follow? What metrics matter at this stage? What are red flags for them? What's the current fundraising climate in this space? Build an audience profile that shapes how the pitch is framed.
+
+**A2: Comparable & Narrative Research** — Find comparable companies that pitched successfully in this space. What story did they tell? What analogies worked? What "X for Y" framing resonated? What market trends can the pitch ride? Find the narrative hooks — the facts, trends, or insights that make investors lean forward.
+
+Complete Wave 1 before starting Wave 2. Pass key findings (audience expectations, comparable narratives) as context.
+
+### Wave 2: Competitive Framing & Why Now
+
+> **Reference:** Read `references/research-wave-2-competitive-framing.md` for agent templates.
+
+Two agents (or two sequential blocks):
+
+**B1: Competitive Framing for Pitch** — How competitors position themselves to investors. What narratives have worked for funded competitors? Where are the gaps in their stories that this pitch can exploit? What objections will investors raise based on the competitive landscape? Build a "pitch-aware" competitive frame.
+
+**B2: Why Now & Market Timing** — Research the timing thesis. What technology shift, behavioral change, or regulatory move makes this the right moment? Find data to support the "why now" — trend charts, adoption curves, policy changes. Assess whether the timing narrative is genuinely strong or forced.
+
+---
+
+### Post-Research Checkpoint
+
+After both waves complete, before synthesis, briefly present what the research found to the user: the investor audience profile, the strongest narrative hooks, the competitive framing angle, and the "why now" thesis. Ask: "Does this align with your pitch vision? Anything to adjust before I build the pitch?"
+
+Keep it to one message — this is a quick alignment check, not a full report.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 3: Pitch Construction
+
+> **Reference:** Read `references/pitch-frameworks.md` for the complete framework, including the integration matrix.
+> **Reference:** Read `references/research-synthesis.md` for synthesis protocol and output templates.
+
+Build the pitch using the integrated framework. The construction combines a problem-solution-insight foundation with a structured 7-element approach — see the integration matrix in `pitch-frameworks.md` for how they connect.
+
+### The Foundation: Problem → Solution → Insight
+
+Every pitch must communicate three things clearly:
+1. **Problem** — The initial conditions. What's broken? Who suffers?
+2. **Solution** — The experiment. What are you building to fix it?
+3. **Insight** — Why this will work. What non-obvious truth powers this?
+
+The insight is what separates a pitch from a product description. Without it, you're just another company doing X.
+
+### The 8 Elements (Pitch Order)
+
+The pitch is constructed using these elements, but the ORDER depends on what's most impressive about the company:
+
+1. **What You Do** — 2 sentences + specific example. Impossible to misunderstand.
+2. **[Lead with strength]** — Whatever is most impressive goes here: traction, team, insight, or market.
+3. **Traction** — Metrics WITH timeframes. "0 to 1,000 users in 8 weeks" not "1,000 users."
+4. **Unique Insight** — What do you know that others don't?
+5. **Business Model** — One clear model. Not a menu of options.
+6. **Market Size** — Bottom-up math. "50,000 customers × $50K ACV = $2.5B" not "$50B TAM."
+7. **Team** — Specific accomplishments, not titles.
+8. **The Ask** — Amount + milestones + timeframe.
+
+### Pitch Ordering Logic
+
+Determine the lead element based on founder strengths:
+- **Strong traction?** → Lead with traction right after "What You Do"
+- **Impressive team?** → Lead with team credentials
+- **Breakthrough insight?** → Lead with the insight that creates an "aha" moment
+- **Huge market?** → Lead with market opportunity
+
+The default order for pre-traction companies: What You Do → Insight → Problem → Solution → Market → Business Model → Team → Ask.
+
+### Construction Rules
+
+- **No jargon.** If the user's pitch contains industry jargon, flag it and provide plain-language alternatives.
+- **Specific > generic.** Replace every vague claim with a specific fact, number, or example.
+- **Show, don't tell.** For the Solution section: describe what a user SEES and DOES — the concrete experience, not abstract features. "The rep opens the dashboard, sees 3 leads highlighted in green with a confidence score. They click one, see the email thread summary, and call. 30 seconds from login to action." This is far more powerful than "Our AI-powered platform surfaces high-intent leads."
+- **Test the 2-sentence description.** If someone hearing it for the first time couldn't explain it back, simplify.
+
+### PAUSE — User Review
+
+Present the pitch narrative structure to the user before generating final deliverables. Show: the opening (2 sentences + example), the ordering rationale, and the key narrative arc. Ask: "Does this story feel right? Is the ordering correct? Anything that's missing or should change?"
+
+### Output Files
+
+Every deliverable file must start with a standardized header: `# {Title}: {product}` followed by `*Skill: sk-pitch | Generated: {date}*`. Every deliverable must end with Red Flags, Yellow Flags, and Sources sections.
+
+Generate all requested formats. If the user didn't specify, generate all of them.
+
+**`workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/pitch-full.md`** — Full pitch narrative (~10 minutes):
+- Opening (2 sentences + example)
+- Complete narrative following the ordered elements
+- Speaker notes for each section (what to emphasize, where to pause, where to invite conversation)
+- Transition sentences between sections
+- Closing and ask
+
+**`workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/pitch-5min.md`** — Compressed narrative (~5 minutes):
+- All 8 elements, trimmed to core claim + one supporting proof point
+- Speaker notes focused on pacing
+
+**`workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/pitch-2min.md`** — Verbal pitch (~2 minutes, ~300 words):
+- Word-for-word script
+- The 2-sentence opener + strongest proof point + insight + ask
+- Delivery notes (pace, emphasis, pauses)
+
+**`workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/pitch-1min.md`** — Elevator pitch (~1 minute, ~150 words):
+- Two versions: formal (investor event) and casual (networking)
+- What You Do + Insight + Ask only
+
+**`workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/pitch-email.md`** — Investor cold email (~500 words):
+- Subject line candidates (3 options)
+- Email body: hook → what you do → traction/insight → why now → ask → close
+- Follow-up email template
+- Personalization notes per investor type
+
+**`workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/pitch-appendix.md`** — Q&A preparation:
+- Top 10 likely investor questions with prepared answers
+- Objection handling (competitive threats, market risks, team gaps)
+- Known weaknesses with honest answers and mitigation plans
+- Financial and competitive backup (if available from prior sessions)
+
+### Summary File
+
+After completing pitch construction, generate a summary file at `workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch.md` containing:
+
+- **The 2-Sentence Description**: The crystallized company description from the 2-Sentence Test
+- **Strongest Element**: Which of the 8 elements is strongest (Traction / Team / Insight / Market) and why
+- **Pitch Ordering**: The element order chosen and rationale
+- **Scorecard Summary** table: All 8 dimensions with /10 scores + Overall /80
+- **Pitch Formats**: Links to all files in `10-pitch/` subdirectory
+- **Investor Roleplay**: Status (offered / completed / skipped)
+
+This summary file is what the export phase will read. Keep it concise and scannable.
+
+### Raw Data
+
+Each agent saves its raw output to `workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/raw/`. Agents must NOT write directly to deliverable paths — raw and synthesized output are separate.
+
+Raw research files:
+- `investor-audience.md`
+- `comparable-narratives.md`
+- `competitive-framing.md`
+- `why-now-timing.md`
+
+---
+
+## Phase 3.5: Pitch Verification
+
+After all pitch deliverables are written, before scoring and review, run a verification pass.
+
+> **Reference:** Read `references/verification-agent.md` for the full verification protocol, universal checks, and skill-specific checks.
+
+### Process
+
+1. Spawn agent **V1: Verification** — it reads all deliverable files and checks for: unlabeled claims, internal contradictions, confidence rating consistency, missing data gaps, missing flags, stale data, and duplicate-source false corroboration
+2. V1 also runs startup-pitch-specific checks: pitch claims vs. source data, cross-format consistency, pitch vs. appendix alignment, honesty checks (traction without timeframes, top-down TAM, titles without accomplishments)
+3. V1 produces `workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/verification-report.md`
+4. **If Critical issues found:** Pause and present issues to the user. Ask: fix first, or proceed as-is?
+5. **If only Warnings/Info:** Show one-line summary and continue to review phase
+
+In Claude.ai or when Agent tool is unavailable, run the verification checks yourself in the main conversation following the same protocol.
+
+---
+
+## Phase 4: Review & Practice
+
+After generating the pitch deliverables, review quality and optionally practice with investor roleplay.
+
+### Step 1: Pitch Scoring Rubric
+
+Review the completed pitch against each dimension. Score honestly — a high score on a weak pitch is useless in front of real investors.
+
+Save to `workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/pitch-scorecard.md`:
+
+| Dimension | Score (1-10) | Rationale |
+|-----------|-------------|-----------|
+| **Clarity** — Can someone explain what you do after hearing 2 sentences? | | |
+| **Strength Sequencing** — Is the most impressive element in the first 60 seconds? | | |
+| **Traction Honesty** — Are numbers accurate, timeframed, and real? | | |
+| **Insight Quality** — Is the insight genuinely non-obvious and specific? | | |
+| **Market Sizing** — Is the math bottom-up with clear assumptions? | | |
+| **Business Model** — One model, clearly stated? | | |
+| **Team Credentials** — Specific, verifiable accomplishments? | | |
+| **Ask Clarity** — Amount + milestones + timeframe, stated with confidence? | | |
+| **Overall** | | |
+
+**Verdict:**
+- **65-80:** Investor-ready. Go pitch.
+- **50-64:** Investor-ready with caveats. Address the weak dimensions first.
+- **35-49:** Needs work. Iterate on the weakest areas before pitching.
+- **Below 35:** Major gaps. Consider running startup-design first to strengthen the foundation.
+
+For each dimension scoring below 7: explain what's weak and suggest a specific fix.
+
+### Step 2: Iteration Loop
+
+Present the scorecard to the user. For each dimension that scored below 7:
+1. Explain the weakness
+2. Ask: "How do we fix this? Do you have more data, or should we reframe?"
+3. Iterate on the relevant pitch sections
+4. Re-score after changes
+
+### Step 3: Investor Roleplay (Optional)
+
+After the scorecard review, offer practice: "Would you like to practice the pitch? I can play an investor and give you feedback."
+
+If the user accepts:
+
+**Choose an investor persona:**
+- **Angel Investor** — Technical, focused on founders + idea. Asks "why you?" and probes domain expertise. Friendly but direct.
+- **Seed VC** — Traction-obsessed, looking for product-market fit signals. Asks about metrics, retention, growth rate. Wants to see momentum.
+- **Series A VC** — Scalability + market size obsessed. Asks about unit economics, competitive moats, expansion path. Thinking about the next round already.
+- **Accelerator Partner** — Looking for coachability + speed of execution. Asks about what you've learned, how fast you ship, what you'd do with mentorship.
+
+**Roleplay flow:**
+1. The user delivers their pitch (any format)
+2. Stay in character as the chosen investor persona
+3. Ask 3-5 questions that this type of investor would ask — drawn from the appendix but adapted to the persona
+4. Push back on weak points — investors do this, and the founder needs practice handling it
+5. After the Q&A, break character and provide feedback:
+   - What landed well
+   - Where the investor would have tuned out
+   - Which answers were strong vs. unconvincing
+   - Specific suggestions for improvement
+
+**Multiple rounds:** The user can practice multiple times with different personas. Each round surfaces different weaknesses.
+
+### Step 4: Delivery Tips
+
+Include practical delivery advice in the scorecard file:
+- **The 60-second rule:** You earn each additional minute. If the first 60 seconds aren't compelling, the rest doesn't matter.
+- **Invite conversation.** Pause after the insight. If an investor starts talking, let them — they're selling themselves.
+- **Own the numbers.** If asked about a metric, know the exact figure and how you calculated it.
+- **Handle "I don't know" well.** "I don't know, but here's how I'd find out" beats a fabricated answer.
+- **Practice the 2-sentence opener** until it's effortless. This is the single most important part of the pitch.
+
+---
+
+## Save & Next
+
+1. Save the main summary to `workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch.md`.
+2. Save all pitch formats to `workspace/sessions/{name}/10-pitch/` directory.
+3. Update `workspace/sessions/{name}/00-session.md`:
+   - Change Phase 10 Pitch status from `[ ] Not Started` to `[x] Complete`
+   - Set Active Phase to "Phase 11: Export"
+   - Set Next Recommended to "Phase 11: Export"
+   - Fill in the "Pitch Score" section:
+     - **Overall Score:** [X]/80
+     - **Strongest Element:** [element name]
+4. Tell the user: "Pitch materials complete! Overall pitch score: [X]/80. You have [list formats created]. When you're ready, run `/sk-export` to generate a comprehensive one-pager summarizing your entire session."
+
+---
+
+## Honesty Protocol
+
+> **Reference:** Read `references/honesty-protocol.md` for full protocol and anti-pattern details.
+
+A pitch that overpromises destroys founder credibility. Core rules apply (label claims, quantify, declare gaps), plus pitch-specific additions:
+
+1. **No inflated metrics.** If traction is weak, the pitch should acknowledge it and pivot to insight, team, or speed of execution. Fabricated traction will surface in due diligence and kill the deal.
+2. **Honest market sizing.** Bottom-up math only. Top-down TAM without justification is a red flag to investors — they've seen it thousands of times.
+3. **Real team credentials.** Specific, verifiable accomplishments. "Built X that did Y" — not vague titles or puffed-up bios.
+4. **Flag pitch weaknesses.** Every pitch has gaps. Identifying them proactively (and having a plan to address them) is stronger than pretending they don't exist.
+5. **Label claims.** Use **[Data]**, **[Estimate]**, **[Assumption]**, **[Opinion]** tags in supporting materials.
+
+| Anti-Pattern | What It Looks Like | What to Say |
+|---|---|---|
+| Inflated TAM | "$50B market" with no math | "Show the bottom-up calculation. Investors do the math." |
+| Vanity traction | "10K signups" with no activation | "Signups aren't traction. What % actually use the product?" |
+| Jargon overload | "AI-powered blockchain synergy" | "What does it actually DO? Say it in words a 10-year-old understands." |
+| No insight | Describing a product, not a thesis | "Why will THIS approach work? What do you know that others don't?" |
+| Weak team | Titles without achievements | "What have you DONE? Accomplishments, not positions." |
+| Vague ask | "We're raising a round" | "How much? For what milestones? In what timeframe?" |
+| "No competition" | "We're the first to do this" | "What do customers do TODAY instead? That's your competition." |
+
+---
+
+## Reference Files
+
+Read only what you need for the current phase.
+
+| File | When to Read | ~Lines | Purpose |
+|------|-------------|--------|---------|
+| `honesty-protocol.md` | Start of session | ~62 | Full honesty protocol with pitch anti-patterns |
+| `research-principles.md` | Before starting Phase 2 | ~64 | Source quality, cross-referencing, data gaps |
+| `research-wave-1-audience-narrative.md` | When running Wave 1 | ~164 | Agent templates for investor + narrative research |
+| `research-wave-2-competitive-framing.md` | When running Wave 2 | ~159 | Agent templates for competitive framing + why now |
+| `pitch-frameworks.md` | During Phase 3 | ~261 | Complete pitch framework with integration matrix |
+| `research-synthesis.md` | After waves complete | ~417 | Synthesis protocol and output templates |
+| `research-scaling.md` | After intake, before Phase 2 | ~75 | Complexity scoring, tier definitions, wave configurations |
+| `verification-agent.md` | After pitch construction | ~80 | Verification protocol, universal + skill-specific checks |

package/skills/sk-pitch/references/honesty-protocol.md

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+# Radical Honesty Protocol
+
+This skill exists to help founders build pitches that survive investor scrutiny — not to craft beautiful fiction. A pitch built on inflated claims collapses in due diligence and destroys founder credibility permanently. These principles are non-negotiable.
+
+## Tell the truth, even when it weakens the pitch
+
+- If traction is weak, say so. Don't dress up vanity metrics as real traction. A founder who says "we're pre-revenue but here's our insight and speed of execution" is more credible than one who inflates signups.
+- If the market is small, own it. "Focused $200M niche growing 25% YoY" beats a fabricated "$50B TAM" that investors will dismantle in 30 seconds.
+- If the team has gaps, acknowledge them. "We need a CTO — here's our plan to recruit one" shows self-awareness. Pretending doesn't.
+- If the founder's claims contradict research, flag it: "Your pitch says X, but the data shows Y. Let's address this before an investor does."
+
+## Separate facts from opinions
+
+- Label every major claim with its basis:
+  - **[Data]** — sourced finding with citation
+  - **[Estimate]** — calculated projection with stated assumptions
+  - **[Assumption]** — unverified belief that needs testing
+  - **[Opinion]** — your analytical judgment
+- In the pitch itself, claims should be presented confidently — but in the appendix and speaker notes, every number should trace to its source.
+- Never present estimates as facts in the pitch appendix.
+
+## Surface flags proactively
+
+In every output file, include a **Flags** section at the end:
+
+- **Red Flags** — Issues that could derail the pitch or due diligence.
+- **Yellow Flags** — Concerns investors might raise that need prepared answers.
+
+If there are no flags, write "No flags identified" — don't skip the section.
+
+## Pitch-Specific Honesty Rules
+
+1. **No inflated metrics.** If the user says "we have 10K users" but they mean signups with 2% activation, the pitch must say "200 active users from 10K signups" — or better, "200 weekly active users growing 15% week-over-week." Investors know the difference.
+
+2. **Honest market sizing.** Only bottom-up math. "There are X customers who pay Y for this type of solution = Z addressable market." Top-down TAM without calculation is a red flag investors have seen thousands of times.
+
+3. **Real team credentials.** Specific, verifiable accomplishments. "Built the payment system at Stripe processing $5B annually" — not "experienced fintech leader." If a credential can't be verified on LinkedIn or via a reference, it shouldn't be in the pitch.
+
+4. **Flag pitch weaknesses.** Every company has them. Identifying weaknesses proactively and having a plan to address them is stronger than hoping investors won't notice. Include a "known weaknesses" section in the appendix.
+
+5. **No fabricated social proof.** Don't write placeholder testimonials or fake logos. If social proof doesn't exist yet, skip it and note it as something to build.
+
+6. **Challenge "we have no competition."** Every company has competition — even if it's doing nothing, using spreadsheets, or hiring an intern. The pitch should address alternatives honestly.
+
+## Pitch Anti-Patterns
+
+| Anti-Pattern | What It Looks Like | What to Say |
+|---|---|---|
+| Inflated TAM | "$50B market" from a Google search | "Show the bottom-up math. Investors will verify." |
+| Vanity traction | Downloads/signups without activation | "How many actually USE the product? That's your real traction." |
+| Jargon overload | "AI-powered blockchain synergy platform" | "What does it DO in plain English? A confused investor is a 'no.'" |
+| No insight | Product description without a thesis | "Why will THIS work? What non-obvious truth powers this company?" |
+| Weak team slide | Titles and years of experience | "What have you BUILT? Accomplishments beat credentials." |
+| Vague ask | "We're raising a round" | "How much? For what milestones? In what timeframe?" |
+| "No competition" | "We're the first to do this" | "What do customers do TODAY instead? That's your competition." |
+
+## Ground rules
+
+- **Ground in evidence.** Every pitch claim should trace to real data or honest estimates.
+- **Make it investable.** A pitch that sounds great but can't survive 5 minutes of Q&A is worse than useless.
+- **No fabrication.** Missing data? Say so and explain how you'll find it.
+- **Respect the founder's credibility.** Their reputation lasts longer than any single fundraise.