agentleFS
SkillMedevSkillMedev/startup-fundraising/skills/series-a-readiness/SKILL.md

series-a-readiness

Skill0 starsChanged 41 days agoMITView on GitHub

Audits whether a seed-stage company clears the Series A bar - benchmark metrics, narrative, team, and data room - and produces a red/yellow/green readiness scorecard with a 90-day gap-closing plan. Use when a founder asks "am I ready for Series A", "what metrics do I need to raise an A", "what goes in a Series A data room", "should I raise now or wait two quarters", or is deciding when to open an A process. Do NOT use for a general pre-pitch hygiene check at any stage - use fundraise-readiness-audit instead - or for choosing which round to raise at all - use fundraising-stage-selector instead.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions1 project uses a version of this.

    Word for word · 1

    1. SkillMedev/founder-fundraising-os★ 0100% same

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 0

    None found.

    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.

  • In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Do not open a process with a red pillar hoping to fix it mid-raise - investors compare notes, and a burned first impression cannot be …

    line 99
  2. Distinctive:

    Do not score growth on one great month.

    line 100
  3. Distinctive:

    Do not present growth without efficiency - a great top line with ugly payback is the most common Series A pass reason.

    line 101
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not lean on a single acquisition channel that has already saturated.

    line 102
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not let a messy cap table or unsigned IP assignments surface first in diligence.

    line 103
  6. Distinctive:

    Every metric in the scorecard reconciles to the bank or billing system - no slide-only numbers.

    line 107

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Series A Readiness

The Series A bar is repeatability, not just traction. Seed proved someone wants the product; the A proves a scalable, predictable engine. The costly mistake this skill prevents: opening a process one quarter early, before the metrics support the story - that burns the exact investors you want, and word travels, so the only reset is waiting. This skill audits readiness across four pillars, builds the data room, and returns a go / fix-first / wait verdict with the milestones that would flip each red pillar green.

This is the Series-A-specific bar. For a stage-agnostic check of whether any raise will survive first meetings and diligence hygiene, use fundraise-readiness-audit; run that first, then this skill applies the A-specific benchmarks on top.

Operating procedure

Step 1: Gather inputs

Collect before scoring. Label any unreconciled number a guess and reconcile it to the bank or the billing system before it enters the scorecard - investors will.

  1. ARR (or revenue run-rate) now, 12 months ago, and monthly for the trailing 12 months.
  2. Net revenue retention, gross margin, CAC payback by channel, burn, and months of runway.
  3. Cohort retention curves (logo and revenue).
  4. Revenue by channel and the share coming from founder-led sales.
  5. Cap table (fully diluted), IP assignment status, prior financing docs.
  6. Leadership org chart and named gaps.
  7. Target close date and current pipeline of investor relationships, if any.

Step 2: Score the Metrics pillar against benchmark bands

The A is a metrics conversation. Score against the band for the model:

  • SaaS: $1-2M+ ARR; growing 2-3x year-over-year (3x is the strong case, below 2x needs an exceptional efficiency story); net revenue retention above 100%; CAC payback under 18 months; gross margin above 70%.
  • Consumer: retention curves that flatten rather than decay to zero, a meaningful organic-growth share, and engagement depth per active user.

Exact thresholds move with the market; the constant is consistent growth plus efficiency across at least two consecutive quarters, not one stellar month. Green: inside the band on growth, NRR, and payback. Yellow: one metric outside the band with a credible trajectory. Red: growth below 2x, NRR below 100%, or payback over 18 months with no improving trend.

Step 3: Score the Narrative pillar

  • A clear, contrarian insight (build it with fundraising-narrative).
  • Evidence the current wedge is working and a defensible path to the next wedge.
  • A category vision that justifies venture-scale returns.

Red if the story is "the same thing but bigger" with no insight, or if the ask does not match the evidence.

Step 4: Score the Team pillar

  • Key leadership gaps identified and either filled or covered by a credible, named hiring plan - investors fund the team that scales the engine, not just the founders. Pair with fundraise-team-hiring.
  • Demonstrated ability to recruit above your weight (at least one hire the company "shouldn't have gotten").

Red if sales is entirely founder-dependent with no repeatable motion and no plan to build one.

Step 5: Score the Data Room pillar and build the index

A clean, complete data room signals operational maturity and shortens diligence. Index, with an owner per line:

  • Financials: historical P&L, balance sheet, monthly model, 18-month forward forecast with stated assumptions.
  • Metrics: cohort retention, CAC/LTV by channel and segment, pipeline, the KPI dashboard.
  • Cap table: current and fully diluted, including option pool.
  • Customers: contracts, churn log, top-account concentration, referenceable accounts.
  • Legal: incorporation docs, IP assignments (every founder and contractor), employee agreements, prior financing documents.
  • Team: org chart, key hires, comp bands.

Red if the books do not close monthly or a data room would take weeks rather than days to assemble. Pair with data-room-builder for the assembly itself.

Step 6: Check timing, then issue the verdict

  • Raise from strength: 6-9 months of runway remaining and an up-and-to-the-right trend when the process opens. Opening with under 6 months of runway reads as desperation and prices accordingly.
  • Relationships with target funds should be warming 2-3 quarters before the raise so the process opens warm, not cold.

Verdict rule: any red pillar means fix-first or wait - never "test the market" with a known red. All green or one yellow with trajectory: go.

Worked artifact: filled scorecard

SERIES A READINESS SCORECARD - Acme Data, B2B SaaS

METRICS      YELLOW  ARR $1.6M (in band); growth 2.4x YoY (in band);
                     NRR 108% (pass); payback 21 months (RED component -
                     over 18; improving from 26 two quarters ago)
NARRATIVE    GREEN   Insight: mid-market teams buy compliance as workflow,
                     not audit; wedge (SOC 2 automation) at 70% win rate
TEAM         YELLOW  No VP Sales; founder closes 80% of revenue; two
                     candidates in final stage - plan credible, unproven
DATA ROOM    GREEN   Books close by day 8 monthly; index 90% populated

VERDICT: FIX-FIRST. Open in ~1 quarter, gated on:
  1. Payback under 18 months for one full quarter (owner: CEO, via
     channel mix shift away from paid)
  2. VP Sales signed and one non-founder-sourced deal closed (owner: CEO)
  3. Remaining data-room items populated (owner: ops lead, 2 weeks)

Deliverable

Produce three artifacts: the readiness scorecard across the four pillars with red/yellow/green ratings and evidence for each rating, a prioritized 90-day gap-closing plan with one owner and one measurable exit criterion per gap, and the complete data-room index with owners per item.

Do NOT

  • Do not open a process with a red pillar hoping to fix it mid-raise - investors compare notes, and a burned first impression cannot be re-run.
  • Do not score growth on one great month; the bar is consistency across quarters.
  • Do not present growth without efficiency - a great top line with ugly payback is the most common Series A pass reason.
  • Do not lean on a single acquisition channel that has already saturated; show the second channel working or budgeted.
  • Do not let a messy cap table or unsigned IP assignments surface first in diligence; they are cheap to fix now and round-killing later.

Quality bar

  • Every metric in the scorecard reconciles to the bank or billing system - no slide-only numbers.
  • Each pillar rating cites specific evidence, not vibes.
  • The 90-day plan has one owner and one measurable exit criterion per gap.
  • The verdict follows the rule: any red means fix-first or wait.
  • Runway at intended open date is 6+ months.

Escalation and neighbors

This is fundraising strategy, not legal or investment advice; securities questions and financing documents go to counsel. Route adjacent jobs: general pre-pitch hygiene to fundraise-readiness-audit, choosing the round to fundraising-stage-selector, the story itself to fundraising-narrative, room assembly to data-room-builder, term negotiation once a term sheet lands to term-sheet-negotiation.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

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.