diagnose
Skill745 starsChanged 38 days agoMITView on GitHub
Startup diagnostic router. Use FIRST when a founder doesn't know where to start, has multiple overlapping problems, or asks a vague question like 'what's wrong with my startup', 'why aren't people buying', 'what should I focus on', 'where do I even begin', 'nothing is working'. Routes to the right framework from the 15 available skills — or tells you when no framework fits and you just need to go talk to people. This is the entry point. Use it before reaching for any specific skill.
193 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- agent-services-at/pluginstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Eclipter/agentstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- venhdev/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Claude-Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- DeevsDeevs/agent-systemtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflowtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use zoom-out, to-prd 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.
victorgarciaesgiSkillzoom-out
Tell the agent to zoom out and give broader context or a higher-level perspective. Use when you're unfamiliar with a section of code or need to understand how it fits into the bigger picture.
Also in 61 projects that use this
GoogleSkillto-prd
Turn the current conversation into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.
Also in 56 projects that use this
GoogleSkillto-issues
Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices.
Also in 53 projects that use this
simo97Skilledit-article
The user will invoke this skill to help them edit an article.
Also in 17 projects that use this
simo97Skillwrite-a-skill
Create new agent skills with proper structure, progressive disclosure, and bundled resources. Use when user wants to create, write, or build a new skill.
Also in 44 projects that use this
AnasX7Skillsetup-pre-commit
Set up Husky pre-commit hooks with lint-staged (Prettier), type checking, and tests in the current repo. Use when user wants to add pre-commit hooks, set up Husky, configure lint-staged, or add commit-time formatting/typechecking/testing.
Also in 27 projects that use this
- +4 more from simo97
Other versions193 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 193
- github/awesome-copilot★ 41ksame name
- epicenter-md/epicenter★ 4.8ksame name
- EpicenterHQ/epicenter★ 4.8ksame name
- CherryHQ/cherry-studio-app★ 4.1ksame name
- pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow★ 1.7ksame name
- formancehq/ledger★ 1.5ksame name
- victorgarciaesgi/regle★ 508same name
- amazingloft999-droid/mattpocock-skills★ 422same name
- openvetta/open-vetta★ 302same name
- InditexTech/weavejs★ 266same name
183 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.
In this repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- 100m-leadsSkill
- 100m-offersSkill
- blue-ocean-strategySkill
- crossing-the-chasmSkill
- four-stepsSkill
- influenceSkill
- lean-startupSkill
- made-to-stickSkill
- mom-testSkill
- monetizing-innovationSkill
- money-modelsSkill
- obviously-awesomeSkill
- spin-sellingSkill
- storybrandSkill
- tractionSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 174 edited versions we read keep these.
3
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 28
Every startup problem maps to one of five root causes.
- Distinctive: line 148
Do not stack 3-4 frameworks.
- Distinctive: line 150
If two skills genuinely both apply, sequence them: "Do X first (skill A).
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 174 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
Note: This skill is independent analysis and commentary, not a reproduction of any original text. It synthesizes frameworks from multiple books with modern startup practice and routes founders to the right tool for their situation.
Diagnose
"The dangerous moment is when you apply the right framework to the wrong problem."
When to Use This Skill
Do you know exactly what's broken?
|-- YES --> Do you know which framework to use?
| |-- YES --> Go use that skill directly. You don't need this.
| +-- NO --> THIS SKILL. You know the problem, need the tool.
+-- NO --> THIS SKILL. Start here.This skill exists because frameworks are tools, not answers. A hammer doesn't help when the problem is a screw. The first job is diagnosis — figuring out what's actually broken before reaching for any specific framework.
The Five Failure Modes
Every startup problem maps to one of five root causes. Most founders misdiagnose which one they have.
| Failure Mode | What It Looks Like | Common Misdiagnosis |
| Product | People try it and stop using it | "We need better marketing" |
| Market | Can't find anyone who cares enough to pay | "We need to build more features" |
| Messaging | Good product, people don't understand what it does | "The product must be wrong" |
| Distribution | People would buy it but never hear about it | "We need a better website" |
| Pricing | People want it but won't pay what you charge | "We need more features to justify the price" |
The Misdiagnosis Problem
Founders almost always misdiagnose their problem by one layer. The pattern:
ACTUAL PROBLEM: WHAT FOUNDERS THINK: WHAT THEY DO:
Product problem → "Marketing isn't working" → Spend on ads (waste)
Market problem → "Need more features" → Build for months (waste)
Messaging problem → "Product must be wrong" → Pivot prematurely (waste)
Distribution → "Need better website" → Redesign 5 times (waste)
Pricing problem → "Need more value" → Add features nobody asked for (waste)The Diagnostic
Answer these honestly. Not what you hope is true — what the evidence says.
Step 1: Do people want this?
Have at least 5 people given you real money (or signed a binding LOI)?
|-- YES --> Go to Step 2.
|-- NO --> Have you talked to 10+ potential customers about their problem
| (not your solution)?
| |-- YES --> Did they describe the problem with emotion and specifics?
| | |-- YES --> You probably have a messaging, pricing, or distribution
| | | problem. Go to Step 2.
| | +-- NO --> You might have a MARKET problem. The problem you're
| | solving may not be painful enough to pay for.
| | → Use mom-test to validate the problem exists.
| | → Use four-steps Customer Discovery process.
| +-- NO --> STOP. You are guessing. Nothing else matters until you
| talk to real people. → Use mom-test.Step 2: Can people understand what you do?
Show your website/pitch to a stranger for 5 seconds. Can they tell you:
1. What you offer?
2. How it makes their life better?
3. What they should do next?
All 3 clear?
|-- YES --> Go to Step 3.
|-- NO --> You have a MESSAGING problem.
| → Use storybrand to restructure your message.
| → Use made-to-stick to make individual messages land.
| → Use obviously-awesome if the confusion is about
| what category you belong in.Step 3: Are the right people finding you?
Are potential customers discovering your product?
|-- YES, enough volume → Go to Step 4.
|-- YES, but wrong people → You have a POSITIONING problem.
| → Use obviously-awesome to redefine your target segment.
| → Use crossing-the-chasm if you're reaching innovators
| but need pragmatists.
|-- NO → You have a DISTRIBUTION problem.
| → Use traction to systematically test channels.
| → Use 100m-leads for tactical execution in chosen channels.
| → Use money-models if you can't AFFORD the channels that work (make acquisition self-funding first).Step 4: Are they buying?
People find you, understand you, but don't buy. Why?
|-- "Too expensive" → PRICING problem.
| → Use monetizing-innovation to redesign price+product together.
| → Use 100m-offers to repackage the offer.
|-- "Not sure it'll work for me" → TRUST problem.
| → Use influence (social proof, authority).
| → Use storybrand (guide authority + testimonials).
|-- "I'll think about it" (then ghost) → URGENCY problem.
| → Use 100m-offers (scarcity, urgency, bonuses, guarantees).
| → Use influence (scarcity, commitment/consistency).
|-- "Went with competitor" → POSITIONING problem.
| → Use obviously-awesome to find your unique value.
| → Use blue-ocean-strategy if the market is commoditized.
|-- Signing up but churning → PRODUCT problem.
| → Use lean-startup to measure and iterate.
| → Use mom-test to understand why they leave.
|-- Buying once but never again / LTV too low to fund growth → MONEY MODEL problem.
| → Use money-models (upsells, downsells, continuity).Step 5: Is the sales process working?
For B2B / high-touch sales:
|-- Meetings happen but deals stall → SALES PROCESS problem.
| → Use spin-selling for the conversation structure.
| → Use influence for persuasion mechanics.
|-- Can't get meetings → Back to Step 3 (distribution).
|-- Deals close but take too long → Use spin-selling
| (you're probably skipping Implication questions).The One-Skill Rule
Every diagnosis should output: one primary skill, one secondary skill (optional), and one concrete next action the founder can do this week.
Do not stack 3-4 frameworks. Framework stacking creates the illusion of thoroughness while reducing usability. A founder drowning in problems doesn't need four life preservers thrown at once — they need one rope and clear instructions.
If two skills genuinely both apply, sequence them: "Do X first (skill A). Only after you have results, then apply skill B." Never in parallel.
The concrete next action must be something a solo founder can actually do — not "100 outreach attempts per day" but "send 10 DMs to people who posted about this problem on Reddit this week." Precision that sounds good but can't be executed is fake precision.
When No Framework Fits
Sometimes the answer is: none of these frameworks apply to your situation right now.
Signs you should stop using frameworks and just go observe reality:
- You've been through 3+ frameworks and nothing improved. The problem might not be strategic — it might be execution, team, timing, or market conditions no book anticipated.
- Your situation is genuinely novel. Frameworks are built from patterns of past companies. If you're doing something with no precedent, the frameworks become educated guesses at best.
- You're using frameworks to avoid the uncomfortable thing. Usually that's talking to customers, firing someone, admitting the idea doesn't work, or making a decision with incomplete information.
- The frameworks are contradicting each other and neither side is clearly right. Some tensions are real worldview differences (customer-centric vs product-centric, niche vs broad). You pick one and commit. No rubric resolves that for you.
The meta-rule: Frameworks help you think more clearly. They don't think for you. If you scored a 9/10 on a rubric but your gut says something is off, trust the gut and investigate. The rubric caught the easy problems. The hard ones are yours.
Quick Reference: Which Skill for What
| Your Situation | Start With | Then |
| "Nobody's buying" | This diagnostic (figure out WHY) | Route to the right skill |
| "I have an idea but haven't talked to anyone" | mom-test | four-steps |
| "People like it but won't pay" | monetizing-innovation | 100m-offers |
| "Our website doesn't convert" | storybrand | made-to-stick |
| "We can't find customers" | traction | 100m-leads |
| "Competitors are eating our lunch" | obviously-awesome | blue-ocean-strategy |
| "Sales calls go nowhere" | spin-selling | influence |
| "We have early users but can't grow past them" | crossing-the-chasm (only if 10+ paying customers) | traction |
| "Should we pivot?" | lean-startup | four-steps |
| "Everything feels broken" | This diagnostic | Then one skill at a time |
| "Customers buy once and disappear" | money-models | 100m-offers |
| "Ads work but we can't afford to scale them" | money-models | 100m-leads |
Scope and Limitations
What This Diagnostic Does
- Routes you to the right framework faster than guessing
- Catches the most common misdiagnosis patterns
- Tells you when to stop using frameworks entirely
What It Doesn't Do
- It doesn't replace judgment. The diagnostic narrows the options. You still decide.
- It assumes the 15 available skills cover your problem. Some problems (hiring, fundraising, legal, operations) aren't covered here.
- It can't diagnose problems you're not honest about. If you skip the hard questions or answer with what you wish were true, the routing breaks.
- It oversimplifies by design. Real startups have 3 problems at once. This makes you pick one to fix first, which is usually correct but sometimes the problems are entangled and need to be solved together.
The Honest Warning
A diagnostic that always gives an answer is more dangerous than one that sometimes says "I don't know." If your situation doesn't fit any of the decision paths above, that's a signal — not a bug. Go talk to customers, advisors, or anyone who'll give you an honest read on what's happening. Then come back.
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
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.

