agentleFS
T4LELT4LEL/Claude-Arsenal/skills/pitch/SKILL.md

pitch

Skill1 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when raising money or presenting the business - or when the user says pitch deck, investors, fundraise, accelerator application, one-pager.

14 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use spec.

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.
  • SentrySkill

    spec

    Produce a verified spec — problem, desired outcome, and acceptance criteria — before building. Use when given a GitHub/Linear issue link, when starting from a fuzzy in-conversation idea, or asked to "figure out what to do" / "scope this" / "what should I build" — whenever the *what* isn't yet pinned down. Grills the ambiguities, checks the premise against the code, and produces acceptance criteria you sign off on — then hands to design-first.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 14 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Assumptions register: every labeled assumption in one place, so the user knows exactly what to defend or validate before the next meeting.

    line 50

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 14 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.

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

Pitch

Fundraising and presentation materials that survive due diligence. Every number is sourced from real data or explicitly labeled as an assumption — no exceptions.

Copy this checklist and check off items as you complete them:

Pitch Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Narrative
- [ ] Step 2: Numbers
- [ ] Step 3: Materials
- [ ] Step 4: Objection prep
- [ ] Step 5: Honesty gate (mandatory)
- [ ] Report

Step 1 — Narrative

Delegate to the biz-strategist agent with the product and market context: the problem, why now, the wedge, moat, and an honest read of the competition. Weak or hand-wavy answers here get flagged, not smoothed over — a shaky narrative should read as shaky in the deck, not be papered over with adjectives.

For the market slide, delegate to the market-analyst agent: TAM/SAM/SOM sized bottom-up with sources and the arithmetic shown — investors check that math first.

Step 2 — Numbers

Delegate to the finance-analyst agent with the real data available: traction to date (real numbers only — never invented), unit economics, and projections. Every projection row gets its assumption labeled inline (growth rate, conversion, churn) so a reader can see exactly what's fact and what's forecast. Also nail down the ask (amount, instrument) and the use of funds.

Step 3 — Materials

Delegate to the copywriter agent with the narrative and numbers: a 10-12 slide deck outline, one message per slide, each headline written as the takeaway sentence (not a topic label). Also produce a one-pager. If final formatted documents are needed, hand off to the docs-writer agent.

Step 4 — Objection prep

Work out the top 5 objections an investor will raise (market size, competition, team gaps, moat, timing) and write honest answers. Anything genuinely unanswerable becomes its own risks slide in the deck — never an omission the investor discovers in diligence.

Step 5 — Honesty gate (mandatory)

Scan every number and claim produced across Steps 1-4 — narrative (market size), numbers, deck/one-pager, and objection answers — no exceptions. Each one is either sourced (cite where — traction dashboard, contract, real usage log) or explicitly labeled an assumption. Any number recalled from memory without a source is an unverified assumption, labeled as such — never presented as fact. This step blocks completion; do not report done until it's finished.

Report

  • Materials: file paths for the deck outline, one-pager, and any docs-writer output.
  • Key numbers table: traction, unit economics, projections — each row flagged sourced or assumption.
  • The ask: amount, instrument, use of funds.
  • Top objections & answers: the 5 from Step 4.
  • Assumptions register: every labeled assumption in one place, so the user knows exactly what to defend or validate before the next meeting.

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.