pre-mortem
Skill1 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Pre-mortem analysis, scenario planning, future state narratives, and contingency frameworks. Use before finalizing any Strategy Kernel, when planning major initiatives, or when preparing Plan B triggers.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 22 edited versions we read keep these.
9
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 10
Before finalizing any Strategy Kernel
- Distinctive: line 11
When planning a major initiative or Goal
- Distinctive: line 12
When buffer enters YELLOW zone (validate contingencies)
- Distinctive: line 13
When the founder is overly optimistic about a single plan
- Distinctive: line 51
Before executing any major initiative, write success AS IF it already happened:
- Distinctive: line 68
After any Plan B activation, define measurable 100-day milestones:
- Distinctive: line 85
Every Action proposal and Strategy Kernel includes structured counter-arguments as STANDARD output:
- Distinctive: line 100
Pre-mortem is mandatory: before any Strategy Kernel is finalized
- Distinctive: line 120
When applying this framework, produce the FULL output immediately.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 22 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Pre-Mortem & Scenario Planning
When to Apply
- Before finalizing any Strategy Kernel
- When planning a major initiative or Goal
- When buffer enters YELLOW zone (validate contingencies)
- When the founder is overly optimistic about a single plan
- Quarterly strategy reviews
Core Framework
Pre-Mortem (5-Step Process)
- Assume total failure: "It is 6 months from now. This strategy has completely failed. Why?"
- Enumerate causes: List 3-5 specific, concrete failure scenarios (not vague risks)
- For each cause, define:
- Prevention measure (what to do now)
- Plan B (what to do if it happens)
- Early warning KPI (what to watch)
- Trigger threshold (when to act)
- Rank by likelihood x impact
- Embed triggers into the monitoring system so Plan B activates automatically
Failure cause: "LinkedIn organic saturated — ICP exhausted in target segment"
Prevention: Track unique ICP accounts remaining; alert at <500
Plan B: Pivot to content-first -> community -> warm intro strategy
Early warning KPI: new connection acceptance rate declining
Trigger: acceptance rate < 15% for 2 consecutive weeksScenario Planning (4 Scenarios with Auto-Triggers)
Define quantitative trigger points for each scenario. When thresholds are hit, Plan B activates AUTOMATICALLY — removing human judgment to prevent bias (loss aversion, sunk cost).
| Scenario | Condition | Response |
| OPTIMISTIC | Exceeds target by 20%+ | Continue scaling. Increase targets. |
| BASE | 80-120% of target | Maintain strategy. Increase effort on constraint Driver. |
| PESSIMISTIC | 40-80% of target + buffer RED + growth <3%/week for 3 weeks | Auto-activate Plan B: pivot channel, reposition ICP, adjust pricing |
| CATASTROPHIC | <40% of target + buffer >90% + negative growth for 2 weeks | Full strategy reset: rebuild Strategy Kernel from scratch |
Future State Narrative (PR/FAQ)
Before executing any major initiative, write success AS IF it already happened:
FUTURE STATE NARRATIVE:
"It is 6 months from now. [Startup] has 100 paying enterprise
customers. Primary channel: LinkedIn thought-leadership (28% response).
Referral program contributed 30%. Average deal: $24K/year, 125% NDR."
INTERNAL FAQ (hard questions):
Q: "What if LinkedIn reach declines further?"
A: "Content -> community -> warm intro fallback (Plan B ready)"Creates a three-part planning package: what success looks like (narrative) + what could go wrong (pre-mortem) + how we'll get there (strategy kernel).
100-Day Gate Reviews
After any Plan B activation, define measurable 100-day milestones:
- Day 30: [specific milestone] — continue/modify/exit?
- Day 60: [specific milestone] — continue/modify/exit?
- Day 100: [specific milestone] — continue/modify/exit?
Prevents drifting in the new plan. Each gate has explicit decision rules.
S-Curve Awareness
Monitor where each Driver/channel sits on its lifecycle:
- Introduction: High effort, low returns — normal, keep investing
- Growth: Returns accelerating — prepare Plan B NOW (not during decline)
- Maturity: Returns plateauing — activate diversification
- Decline: Returns dropping — Plan B should already be active
Devil's Advocate
Every Action proposal and Strategy Kernel includes structured counter-arguments as STANDARD output:
Devil's Advocate:
1. "LinkedIn organic reach declining ~15% YoY. Channel may saturate."
2. "Segment data shows email outperforms for enterprise deals >$50K."
3. "Requires ~10h/week founder time — 25% of capacity."
Risk assessment: MODERATE
Recommendation: Proceed with 30-day review gate.
Plan B if underperforms: Pivot to warm intros via mutual connections.Decision Rules
- Pre-mortem is mandatory before any Strategy Kernel is finalized
- Triggers must be quantitative — no vague "if things go badly"
- Auto-activation removes bias — pre-commit to switching, don't decide in the moment
- Devil's Advocate is not optional — include on every proposal
- S-curve timing: Prepare Plan B during growth phase, not decline
Anti-Patterns to Detect
| Anti-Pattern | Signal | Response |
| Single-plan thinking | No Plan B defined | "What happens if this doesn't work? Let's define triggers now." |
| Vague contingencies | "We'll figure it out" | "Contingencies need specific triggers and pre-defined responses." |
| Plan B avoidance | Emotional attachment to Plan A | "Pre-committing to triggers removes emotion from the switching decision." |
| Late Plan B prep | Preparing alternatives during decline | "S-curve: prepare alternatives during growth, not decline." |
| Optimism bias | Ignoring pre-mortem results | "The pre-mortem identified real risks. Ignoring them doesn't eliminate them." |
Anticipative Execution Reminder
When applying this framework, produce the FULL output immediately. Do not ask the founder which parts to analyze or which options to consider. Infer from business context, present the complete deliverable, and let the founder react to concrete work — not abstract choices.
Other versions28 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 28
- avelikiy/great_cto★ 113same name
- MbappeWU/murder-board★ 15same name
- ysskrishna/ai-agent-skills★ 13same name
- jackjin1997/ClawForge★ 12same name
- sergeeey/Claude-cod-top-2026★ 9same name
- carlkibler/agent-skills★ 6same name
- fzfclee/consulting-skills★ 6same name
- broomva/skills★ 4same name
- Adhamxon/claude-code-skills★ 2same name
- skytiger6724/qwen-skills★ 2same name
18 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use brainstorm-experiments-existing, positioning-ideas and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
skytiger6724Skillbrainstorm-experiments-existing
Design experiments to test assumptions for an existing product — prototypes, A/B tests, spikes, and other low-effort validation methods. Use when validating assumptions, testing feature ideas cheaply, or planning product experiments.
Also in 6 projects that use this
skytiger6724Skillpositioning-ideas
Brainstorm product positioning ideas differentiated from competitors. Identifies top competitors and generates positioning statements with rationale. Use when developing product positioning, differentiating from competitors, or crafting brand positioning strategy.
Also in 6 projects that use this
45ckSkillpestle-analysis
Also in 6 projects that use this
launchapp-devSkillinterview-script
Create a structured user interview script with warm-up, core exploration, and wrap-up sections. Use when preparing for user research interviews to ensure consistent, insightful conversations.
Also in 6 projects that use this
- +8 more from skytiger6724
In this repository24 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- anticipatory-sellingSkill
- choice-architectureSkill
- confidenceSkill
- content-rulesSkill
- critical-chainSkill
- culture-mapSkill
- disruptionSkill
- effectuationSkill
- failure-essenceSkill
- growth-metricsSkill
- kpi-treeSkill
- network-effectsSkill
- pipelineSkill
- plan-bSkill
- qualificationSkill
- quest-interviewSkill
- retention-cohortsSkill
- review-engineSkill
- root-causeSkill
- strategy-kernelSkill
- stupid-gamesSkill
- unit-economicsSkill
- value-stickSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

