startup-ideation-kit 1.0.0 → 2.0.0

package/skills/sk-pitch/references/research-synthesis.md

@@ -0,0 +1,423 @@
+# Pitch Research Synthesis Protocol
+
+## Before Writing
+
+1. Read ALL raw files in `{project-name}/raw/` before writing anything
+2. Read ALL prior session files (from startup-design, startup-competitors, startup-positioning) if they exist
+3. Identify the strongest pitch elements — what's most impressive about this company?
+4. Determine the optimal pitch order based on strengths
+5. Check if the pitch was built with or without validated research data — this affects the scorecard
+
+## Cross-Source Connections to Look For
+
+These are pitch-specific patterns that emerge when you combine research with founder data:
+
+- **Strong traction + weak insight = lead with traction** — the numbers speak for themselves
+- **Weak traction + strong insight = lead with insight** — reframe the conversation around the thesis
+- **Strong team + emerging market = lead with team** — investors bet on people in uncertain markets
+- **Large market + clear model = lead with opportunity** — the math is compelling
+- **Comparable success story + similar approach = use the analogy** — investors love pattern-matching
+- **Investor fatigue in space + unique angle = differentiate the narrative** — show you're different
+- **Strong "why now" + weak traction = lead with timing** — the wave is more impressive than the surfer
+- **Competitive gaps + unique attributes = frame against competitors** — show the opening
+
+## Confidence Rating
+
+Apply to every major claim in the pitch materials:
+
+- **High:** Multiple sources agree, data is recent, verifiable
+- **Medium:** Some evidence but gaps, or data partially disagree
+- **Low:** Limited data, mostly inferred, or data older than 12 months
+
+In the pitch itself, only use High and Medium confidence claims. Low confidence items go in the appendix as "areas to strengthen."
+
+---
+
+## Pitch Construction Process
+
+### Step 1: Identify Pitch DNA
+
+Before writing anything, answer these questions:
+
+1. **What's the single most impressive thing about this company?** (This determines pitch order)
+2. **What's the 2-sentence description?** (This is non-negotiable — must be crystal clear)
+3. **What's the unique insight?** (This separates a pitch from a product description)
+4. **What's the "why now"?** (Timing thesis — what makes this moment right)
+5. **What's the biggest weakness?** (Must have a prepared answer)
+
+### Step 2: Assemble the Building Blocks
+
+Map available data to the 8 pitch elements:
+
+| Element | Source | Strength | Notes |
+|---------|--------|----------|-------|
+| What You Do | Intake / positioning-statement.md | | |
+| Traction | Intake / scorecard.md | | |
+| Unique Insight | Intake / research | | |
+| Business Model | lean-canvas.md / revenue-model.md | | |
+| Market Size | market-analysis.md / intake | | |
+| Team | Intake | | |
+| The Ask | Intake | | |
+| Why Now | Wave 2 research / intake | | |
+
+Strength ratings: Strong / Adequate / Weak / Missing
+
+**Data Foundation Check:** Note whether each element is backed by validated research (from prior startup skills) or self-reported data (from intake only). This affects the scorecard in Phase 4.
+
+### Step 3: Determine Pitch Order
+
+Based on element strengths, select the template from `pitch-frameworks.md`:
+- Strongest element is Traction → Traction-Led
+- Strongest element is Team → Team-Led
+- Strongest element is Insight → Insight-Led
+- No clear standout → Pre-Traction (default)
+
+### Step 4: Write the Narrative
+
+Construct the pitch as a continuous story, not a collection of sections. Each element should flow naturally into the next. The narrative should feel like:
+
+"Here's what we do. [Here's why it's working / Here's what we know / Here's who we are.] Here's the problem we're solving. Here's our solution. Here's how big this can get. Here's how we make money. Here's why we're the team to do it. Here's what we need."
+
+### Step 5: Generate All Requested Formats
+
+From the full narrative, derive each format by compression — not by rewriting from scratch. Each shorter format is a subset of the full pitch.
+
+---
+
+## Output File Templates
+
+### pitch-full.md
+
+```markdown
+# Full Pitch Narrative: {product}
+*Skill: startup-pitch | Generated: {date}*
+
+## Pitch DNA
+- **Lead element:** {traction/team/insight/market}
+- **2-sentence opener:** {the opener}
+- **Unique insight:** {one sentence}
+- **Why now:** {timing thesis}
+- **The ask:** {amount + milestones}
+- **Data foundation:** {Validated (prior startup skills) / Self-reported (intake only)}
+
+## Full Narrative (~10 minutes)
+
+### Opening — What We Do
+{2 sentences + specific example}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance — pace, emphasis, pauses}
+> **Timing:** 0:00 - 0:45
+
+### {Lead Element — varies by pitch type}
+{Content}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 0:45 - 2:00
+
+### Problem
+{Problem description — severity, consequences, who suffers}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 2:00 - 3:00
+
+### Solution
+{How it works — describe the concrete user experience. What does the user SEE and DO? Not abstract features — the specific interaction that solves the problem. If the product exists, describe it as if showing a demo. If pre-launch, describe the intended experience vividly enough that the investor can picture it.}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 3:00 - 4:00
+
+### Traction
+{Metrics with timeframes — growth story. If no traction: skip this section, don't fake it.}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 4:00 - 5:00
+
+### Market Size
+{Bottom-up calculation — show the math: number of customers × price = addressable market. Beachhead + expansion path.}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 5:00 - 6:00
+
+### Business Model
+{One clear model — pricing, unit economics if available}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 6:00 - 6:30
+
+### Why Now
+{Timing thesis from Wave 2 research. Technology shift, behavioral change, regulatory move. If timing isn't strong, keep this brief or fold into another section.}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 6:30 - 7:00
+
+### Team
+{Accomplishments, not titles. For each person: name, role, most impressive specific result.}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 7:00 - 7:30
+
+### The Ask
+{Amount + milestones + timeframe. Be direct and confident.}
+
+> **Speaker notes:** {delivery guidance}
+> **Timing:** 7:30 - 8:00
+
+### Close
+{Final sentence — memorable, forward-looking. Leave them wanting to talk more.}
+
+## Transition Sentences
+{How each section flows into the next — so the pitch feels like a story, not a checklist}
+
+## Red Flags
+- {issues investors might raise}
+
+## Yellow Flags
+- {concerns to prepare for}
+
+## Sources
+- {key data sources used in the pitch}
+```
+
+### pitch-5min.md
+
+```markdown
+# Five-Minute Pitch: {product}
+*Skill: startup-pitch | Generated: {date}*
+
+## The Narrative (~5 minutes)
+
+{Each element trimmed to its core claim + one supporting proof point. No secondary arguments — just the strongest version of each element.}
+
+### Opening — What We Do (0:00 - 0:30)
+{2 sentences + example}
+
+### {Lead Element} (0:30 - 1:15)
+{Core claim + proof}
+
+### Problem + Solution (1:15 - 2:30)
+{Problem in 2 sentences → solution as concrete experience}
+
+### Market + Business Model (2:30 - 3:30)
+{Bottom-up math + one-sentence model}
+
+### Why Now + Team (3:30 - 4:30)
+{Timing thesis + team accomplishments}
+
+### The Ask (4:30 - 5:00)
+{Amount + milestones + timeframe}
+
+## Speaker Notes
+{Pacing guidance — where to breathe, where to let silence work}
+
+## Red Flags
+- {concerns}
+
+## Sources
+- {key sources}
+```
+
+### pitch-2min.md
+
+```markdown
+# Two-Minute Pitch: {product}
+*Skill: startup-pitch | Generated: {date}*
+
+## The Script (~300 words)
+
+{Word-for-word script, broken into natural paragraphs. Each paragraph = one element.}
+
+## Delivery Notes
+- **Opener pace:** Slow and clear — this is where understanding happens
+- **Emphasis points:** {words/phrases to stress}
+- **Natural pauses:** {where to breathe and let it sink in}
+- **Energy peak:** {which sentence should have the most energy}
+- **Close:** Confident, direct, unhurried
+
+## Structure Breakdown
+- **0:00 - 0:20:** What we do (2 sentences + example)
+- **0:20 - 0:40:** Strongest signal (traction/insight/team)
+- **0:40 - 1:00:** Problem + solution
+- **1:00 - 1:20:** Market + business model
+- **1:20 - 1:40:** Why us + why now
+- **1:40 - 2:00:** The ask
+
+## The Email Test
+{Paraphrase of the pitch in one paragraph — what someone should be able to repeat after hearing it once}
+
+## Red Flags
+- {concerns}
+
+## Sources
+- {key sources}
+```
+
+### pitch-1min.md
+
+```markdown
+# Elevator Pitch: {product}
+*Skill: startup-pitch | Generated: {date}*
+
+## Formal Version (~150 words)
+{For investor events, demo days, formal introductions. Structured: What We Do → Insight → Ask.}
+
+## Casual Version (~100 words)
+{For networking, dinner parties, hallway conversations. Conversational tone, no pitch structure visible. Sounds like you're telling a friend about your company.}
+
+## When Someone Asks "So What Do You Do?"
+{The 2-sentence answer + example that leads to "tell me more"}
+
+## Delivery Notes
+- Don't rush. 1 minute is longer than it feels.
+- End with a question, not a statement — "Would that be useful for [your company]?" invites conversation.
+- Match energy to context. Formal events: crisp, confident. Casual: relaxed, curious.
+
+## Red Flags
+- {concerns}
+```
+
+### pitch-email.md
+
+```markdown
+# Investor Email Pitch: {product}
+*Skill: startup-pitch | Generated: {date}*
+
+## Subject Line Candidates
+| Subject Line | Angle | Best For |
+|---|---|---|
+| "{subject 1}" | {angle} | {investor type} |
+| "{subject 2}" | {angle} | {investor type} |
+| "{subject 3}" | {angle} | {investor type} |
+
+## Cold Email (~500 words)
+
+{Hook — one sentence that makes them read the next line}
+
+{What we do — 2 sentences + example}
+
+{Traction or insight — the strongest signal, with numbers}
+
+{Why now — one sentence timing thesis}
+
+{The ask — specific and direct}
+
+{Close — easy next step, not "let me know your thoughts"}
+
+## Follow-Up Email (~200 words)
+
+{Shorter, references the first email. Adds one new data point. Clear CTA.}
+
+## Personalization Notes
+- **For angel investors:** Lead with the problem and your personal connection to it
+- **For VCs:** Lead with traction or market size
+- **For accelerators:** Lead with team and speed of execution
+- **For strategic partners:** Lead with mutual opportunity
+
+## Red Flags
+- {email-specific concerns}
+
+## Sources
+- {key sources}
+```
+
+### pitch-appendix.md
+
+```markdown
+# Pitch Appendix: {product}
+*Skill: startup-pitch | Generated: {date}*
+
+## Top 10 Investor Questions (with Prepared Answers)
+
+### Q1: {Most likely question}
+**Short answer:** {2-3 sentences — for verbal delivery}
+**Detailed answer:** {full explanation with data — for follow-up emails}
+**Source:** {where the data comes from}
+
+[Repeat for Q2-Q10]
+
+## Objection Handling
+
+### "{Objection 1}"
+**Why they ask this:** {investor's concern}
+**Response:** {how to address it honestly}
+**Supporting data:** {evidence}
+
+[Repeat for each common objection]
+
+## Known Weaknesses
+{Honest assessment of pitch gaps — with plans to address each. Identifying weaknesses proactively is stronger than hoping investors won't notice.}
+
+## Financial Backup
+{Detailed numbers if available from prior sessions. If not: note "Financial projections not yet validated — consider running startup-design for detailed modeling."}
+
+## Competitive Detail
+{Deeper competitive analysis for Q&A — from prior sessions if available. If not: note "Competitive landscape not fully mapped — consider running startup-competitors for battle cards."}
+
+## Red Flags
+- {appendix-specific concerns}
+
+## Yellow Flags
+- {areas needing more data}
+
+## Data Gaps & Limitations
+- {what data is missing — every pitch has blind spots, be explicit}
+
+## Sources
+- {all data sources used across all deliverables, with tier ratings}
+```
+
+## Post-Synthesis Verification
+
+After writing all pitch deliverables (before the scorecard/review phase), run the Verification Agent protocol. See `references/verification-agent.md` for the full process. The verification step checks all deliverables for unlabeled claims, internal contradictions, confidence rating consistency, and startup-pitch-specific coherence (pitch claims vs. source data, cross-format consistency, pitch vs. appendix alignment, honesty checks).
+
+---
+
+### pitch-scorecard.md
+
+```markdown
+# Pitch Scorecard: {product}
+*Skill: startup-pitch | Generated: {date}*
+
+## Data Foundation
+**Built with:** {Validated research (startup-design/competitors/positioning) / Self-reported data (intake only)}
+{If self-reported: "Note: This pitch was built without validated research data. Scores in Market Sizing, Traction Honesty, and competitive Q&A may improve significantly after running startup-design or startup-competitors."}
+
+## Scoring Rubric
+
+| 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? Or acknowledged as missing?} |
+| **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 or startup-positioning to strengthen the foundation.
+
+## Weak Dimensions (Score < 7)
+For each:
+- **Dimension:** {name}
+- **What's weak:** {specific problem}
+- **How to fix:** {actionable suggestion}
+- **Data needed:** {what information would strengthen this}
+
+## Delivery Readiness
+- [ ] 2-sentence opener practiced until effortless
+- [ ] All numbers memorized (not read from notes)
+- [ ] Prepared answers for top 5 investor questions
+- [ ] Know the biggest weakness and how to address it
+- [ ] Practiced with at least one person (or investor roleplay)
+
+## Red Flags
+- {scorecard-specific concerns}
+
+## Yellow Flags
+- {areas to watch}
+```

package/skills/sk-pitch/references/research-wave-1-audience-narrative.md

@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
+# Wave 1: Audience & Narrative Intelligence
+
+Read `research-principles.md` first.
+
+---
+
+## Agent A1: Investor & Audience Intelligence
+
+```
+Research task: Build investor audience profile for {product description} pitch
+Context: {product summary from intake}
+Target audience: {VC/angels/accelerator/demo day — from intake}
+Stage: {pre-seed/seed/Series A — from intake}
+
+RESEARCH PROTOCOL:
+
+ROUND 1 — Fundraising landscape in this space (4-5 searches):
+- "{product category} startup funding {current year}"
+- "{product category} VC investments {current year}"
+- "seed stage {product category} fundraise"
+- "{product space} Series A metrics benchmarks"
+- "what VCs look for in {product category} startups"
+
+ROUND 2 — Specific audience research (3-4 searches):
+If specific investors/funds are named:
+- "{fund name} portfolio companies"
+- "{fund name} investment thesis"
+- "{investor name} blog pitch advice"
+- "{fund name} demo day companies"
+
+If no specific audience:
+- "best investors {product category} {current year}"
+- "{product category} angel investors"
+- "{accelerator name} recent batch companies"
+
+ROUND 3 — Stage-appropriate metrics (3-4 searches):
+- "seed stage metrics investors expect {current year}"
+- "{product category} startup benchmarks Series A"
+- "what traction for seed round {product category}"
+- "seed round size {product category} {current year}"
+- "pre-seed vs seed metrics expectations"
+
+ROUND 4 — Current climate (2-3 searches):
+- "fundraising climate {current year} startups"
+- "{product category} funding trends {current year}"
+- "VC sentiment {product space} {current year}"
+
+OUTPUT FORMAT:
+
+## Investor Audience Profile
+
+### Fundraising Landscape
+- Current funding climate in {space}: {bullish/neutral/bearish}
+- Recent notable rounds: {examples with amounts}
+- Average round size at this stage: {range}
+- Key metrics investors expect at this stage:
+  - {metric 1}: {benchmark}
+  - {metric 2}: {benchmark}
+  - {metric 3}: {benchmark}
+
+### Target Investor Profile
+- Fund/investor type: {VC/angel/accelerator}
+- Typical check size: {range}
+- Investment thesis alignment: {how this pitch fits}
+- Portfolio overlap: {similar companies they've funded}
+- Red flags for this audience: {what turns them off}
+
+### Stage-Appropriate Expectations
+- What "good traction" looks like at this stage: {specifics}
+- What "great traction" looks like: {specifics}
+- Minimum viable metrics to raise: {specifics}
+- Common objections at this stage: {list}
+
+### Current Climate Notes
+- Fundraising difficulty: {easier/normal/harder than 12 months ago}
+- Hot topics investors are interested in: {trends}
+- Topics investors are fatigued by: {overhyped areas}
+
+> Data labels: Mark each finding with [Data], [Estimate], [Assumption], or [Opinion]
+```
+
+---
+
+## Agent A2: Comparable & Narrative Research
+
+```
+Research task: Find comparable pitch narratives and story hooks for {product description}
+Context: {product summary from intake}
+Market: {market/category from intake}
+Competitors: {known competitors from intake}
+
+RESEARCH PROTOCOL:
+
+ROUND 1 — Comparable companies and their stories (4-5 searches):
+- "{competitor 1} pitch deck" OR "{competitor 1} fundraise announcement"
+- "{competitor 2} pitch deck" OR "{competitor 2} seed round"
+- "{product category} startup pitch deck examples"
+- "{product category} demo day pitch"
+- "{product category} successful pitch story"
+
+ROUND 2 — Narrative patterns that work (3-4 searches):
+- "{product category} for {customer type}" startup analogy
+- "X for Y" startup pitch examples {product category}
+- "{problem} startup story founder"
+- "why I built {product category}" founder story
+
+ROUND 3 — Market narrative and trends (3-4 searches):
+- "{product category} market trends {current year}"
+- "why now {product category}" timing narrative
+- "{product space} tailwinds {current year}"
+- "{regulatory/technology/behavioral change} driving {product category}"
+
+ROUND 4 — What doesn't work (2-3 searches):
+- "{product category} startup failed pitch" OR "common mistakes {product category} pitch"
+- "investor objections {product category}"
+- "{product category} startup risk" investors worried about
+
+OUTPUT FORMAT:
+
+## Comparable Narratives
+
+### Successful Pitches in This Space
+For each comparable:
+- **Company:** {name}
+- **What they raised:** {amount, stage, when}
+- **Narrative angle:** {how they framed the story}
+- **Key hook:** {what made investors lean in}
+- **Analogy used:** {if any "X for Y" framing}
+- **Source:** {where this info came from}
+
+### Narrative Hooks Available
+Rank by strength (strongest first):
+
+1. **{Hook name}** — {description}
+   - Why it works: {reasoning}
+   - How to use: {specific suggestion}
+   - Risk: {potential downside}
+
+2. **{Hook name}** — {description}
+   [same structure]
+
+### "X for Y" Candidates
+| Analogy | Clarity | Risk | Recommendation |
+|---------|---------|------|----------------|
+| "{product} is like {X} for {Y}" | High/Med/Low | {what could go wrong} | Use/Avoid |
+
+Only recommend "X for Y" if:
+- X is widely known to the target investor audience
+- The analogy clarifies more than it confuses
+- It doesn't box you into the wrong category
+
+### "Why Now" Narrative
+- **Timing thesis:** {what makes this the right moment}
+- **Evidence:** {trend data, regulatory change, behavioral shift}
+- **Strength:** Strong / Moderate / Weak
+- **Risk:** {what could undermine the timing argument}
+
+### What NOT to Do
+- Narratives that have been overused: {examples}
+- Objections investors will raise: {top 3-5}
+- Narrative traps to avoid: {specific to this space}
+
+> Data labels: Mark each finding with [Data], [Estimate], [Assumption], or [Opinion]
+```