pitch
Skill12 starsChanged 47 days agoMITView on GitHub
Derive a 10-section pitch from BP v0.0.2 into docs/business/PITCH.md, then ask the founder whether the BP and Pitch should live online inside the product (/pitch, /investors) — running a redaction gate over what must never go public. Runs at WIZARD stage 2.9. Use when the user says "preciso de um pitch", "vou apresentar pra investidor", "quero pôr o BP no site", "dá pra deixar isso público?", "como resumo tudo isso em 10 slides?".
14 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- serhiileniv/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- serhiileniv/ccstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- eggs-gd/career-spacetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- aya-taleb/biz-ready-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- bengialb/pitch-skilltheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- FakharEAli/book-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use launch and 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.
MicrosoftSkilllaunch
Launch and automate VS Code Insiders with the Copilot Chat extension using @playwright/cli via Chrome DevTools Protocol. Use when you need to interact with the VS Code UI, automate the chat panel, test the extension UI, or take screenshots. Triggers include 'automate VS Code', 'interact with chat', 'test the UI', 'take a screenshot', 'launch with debugging'.
Also in 3 projects that use this
SentrySkillspec
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
Other versions14 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 14
- eggs-gd/career-space★ 4same name
- FakharEAli/book-skills★ 3same name
- aya-taleb/biz-ready-skills★ 1same name
- madeehahassan/plsbuild-os★ 1same name
- ORBWEVA/founder-pitch★ 1same name
- T4LEL/Claude-Arsenal★ 1same name
- vertile-ai/skills★ 1same name
- bengialb/pitch-skill★ 0same name
- cyb3rcricket/cricket-mode★ 0same name
- mfraunhofer/claude-skills★ 0same name
4 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 repository28 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- business-plan-impact-reviewSkill
- codemapSkill
- cost-watchdogSkill
- daily-standupSkill
- decision-logSkill
- deploy-vercel-supabaseSkill
- feature-scaffoldSkill
- first-100-usersSkill
- grow-sustainablySkill
- multi-ai-reviewSkill
- os-self-testSkill
- plain-portuguese-explainerSkill
- privacy-auditSkill
- processizeSkill
- product-briefSkill
- project-genesisSkill
- prototype-labSkill
- registry-pickSkill
- release-checkSkill
- research-wavesSkill
- rollback-safeSkill
- secrets-disciplineSkill
- secrets-scanSkill
- sprint-managementSkill
- sprint-roadmapSkill
- usage-monitorSkill
- verify-build-worksSkill
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
- Distinctive: line 74
If the answer is (a) or (b), this stops being a document decision and becomes product surface.
“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.
Files
Pitch
Two jobs, in order: compress the Business Plan into something a person will sit through, then decide — explicitly — whether it goes on the public internet.
Runs at WIZARD stage 2.9, after BP v0.0.2 is accepted and before Phase 3.
Job 1 — Write the pitch
Source: docs/business/BUSINESS-PLAN.md v0.0.2. Template: templates/business/PITCH.template.md. Output: docs/business/PITCH.md.
The pitch derives from the BP. It never adds to it.
If a claim belongs in the pitch but is not in the BP, that is a signal the BP is incomplete — go back and fix the BP, then re-derive. A pitch that says something the BP does not is how founders end up contradicting their own diligence materials.
Ten sections maximum. If it does not fit, the problem is the argument, not the format.
Job 2 — Ask the publication question
This is a suggestion, not a default. Most founders never consider putting the BP online. The skill's job is to put the option on the table with honest trade-offs and then accept whatever the user decides. "Not now" is a complete, valid answer.
Present all three options:
| Option | What it means |
| (a) Tudo público | BP + Pitch on a public URL, indexed |
| (b) Público enxuto + completo gated | Trimmed public page; full version behind login or a secret link |
| (c) Nada online por enquanto | Decide again after launch |
State both sides. Do not sell it.
In favor: a link beats a PDF attachment; builds authority; lets an investor, partner, or large customer qualify themselves without a meeting; kills the problem of a stale version circulating.
Against: competitors read everything, including what you consider an advantage; published numbers become expectations you get held to; it requires maintenance, and a stale public BP is worse than none; several sections cannot go out at all.
The redaction gate
Mandatory when the answer is (a) or (b). Publishing a Business Plan means publishing whatever is inside it.
| Usually safe | Do NOT publish without explicit, considered approval |
| Problem and solution narrative | Financial projections, burn, runway |
| Positioning and differentiation | Unit economics — CAC, LTV, margins |
| Market context with public sources | Pricing not yet announced |
| Personas, generalized | Personas traceable to a real interviewee |
| Directional roadmap | Dated delivery commitments |
| Team and mission | Fundraising status, valuation, cap table |
| Metrics you will stand behind | Internal risk register |
| — | Supplier and partner terms |
| — | Competitor teardown naming specific weaknesses |
Three rows carry consequences beyond embarrassment:
- Personas from real interviews are personal data. "Marina, 34, gerente de clínica em Porto Alegre" is an LGPD problem when Marina is someone you actually interviewed. Invoke
privacy-auditbefore publishing any persona or team entry. - Competitor teardowns invite legal and PR retaliation. "We are the one that does X" is positioning. "Their onboarding is broken" is a liability.
- Published numbers become commitments. A projection on a public page gets quoted back during diligence, months later, when it is no longer true.
Get row-by-row sign-off. Record it in the redaction table inside PITCH.md — Phase 4 builds the page from that table.
Route the downstream consequences
If the answer is (a) or (b), this stops being a document decision and becomes product surface. Record it so later phases pick it up:
| Consequence | Lands in | When |
Routes (/pitch, /investors), navigation placement | Product Brief | stage 4.1 |
Public vs. gated, auth model, robots.txt, SEO, PDF export | Technical Plan | stage 4.2 |
| Analytics on who views the page — personal data | privacy-audit | before shipping |
| The page as acquisition and credibility asset | first-100-users, launch-agent | post-launch |
| Who maintains it and how often | PITCH.md maintenance owner field | now |
The last row is the one that gets skipped. An unowned public BP goes stale in a quarter. If nobody owns it, the honest answer is (c).
Outputs
docs/business/PITCH.md
session-log/<YYYY-MM-DD>-pitch-and-publication-decision.mdThe session-log entry must record which option was chosen and why — including a "not now", which is the answer most likely to be revisited later.
Re-run when
- The BP changes materially — the pitch is derived, so it drifts.
business-plan-impact-reviewshould flag this. - The founder's audience changes (accelerator application, then investors, then enterprise buyers).
- A previously-deferred publication decision comes back up, typically around launch.
Related
- Source document:
docs/business/BUSINESS-PLAN.md - Template:
templates/business/PITCH.template.md - Gate before publishing:
privacy-audit - Hard-to-reverse call?
multi-ai-review— publishing is very hard to un-publish.
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.

