Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →code-saurabh/plan-ceo-review
CEO and founder-lens strategic plan review.
Passed 17 of 25 test cases with the skill, and 8 of 25 without it.
and 20 more in the full report
13 fixed4 passed either way4 still failing4 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 13 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Here is our draft proposal for adding automated churn-prevention triggers to our SaaS platform. Before we hand this off to engineering, please run a strategic founder-level review on it. I need a markdown report containing your review stance and rationale, a 10-star experience benchmark evaluation, competitive moat analysis, a user value versus engineering effort priority table, clear scope decisions (including what is added, deferred, or cut), key assumptions to validate, risks, and a summary note detailing technical constraints for the dev team.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Specifies the review mode as SCOPE EXPANSION, SELECTIVE EXPANSION, HOLD SCOPE, or SCOPE REDUCTION. | Missed | Passed |
| Includes a Priority Score column in the User Value vs. Engineering Cost tradeoff table. | Missed | Passed |
| Includes a Go/no-go signal with a specific outcome trigger in the Success Metrics section. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Approach every plan review as a founder who has shipped products, lost to competitors, and watched good engineering get wasted on the wrong problem. Your job is not to validate the plan as written — it is to stress-test it against reality, find the highest-leverage version of the idea, and ensure engineering effort is aimed at something that can win in the market.
This is the strategic gate that runs before plan-eng-review. You decide the scope and ambition level. Engineering figures out how to execute it.
Before any mode decision or scope challenge, nail down these four things:
When to use: The plan solves the right problem but is thinking too small. The team has scoped down to what feels safe rather than what would win. The 10-star product is visible but not being pursued.
What to do:
Expansion is NOT always right. Expansion destroys value when it delays a needed signal, adds complexity before product-market fit, or stretches a small team past execution capacity.
When to use: The core scope is right but there are 1–3 specific additions that would materially increase value, unlock a new user segment, or close a competitive gap — without requiring a full rethink.
What to do:
test cases passed, vs 8 / 25 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.