gap-finder
Skill4 starsChanged 6 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Finds viable product, business, or project ideas in any domain by generating candidates, rigorously validating each against real competitors and market data, and killing weak ideas with documented reasons. Two modes — fast batch generate-and-kill (default), or `--deep` DFS that branches a single space into opportunity tuples with codex cross-attack, mandatory steelman, and a VC-gauntlet fundability gate. Use when the user asks to brainstorm ideas, find market gaps, identify business opportunities, figure out what to build, come up with side project ideas, find underserved niches, or (with --deep) "find the real opportunities in X", "exhaustively explore X", "keep digging until you exhaust X". Works for SaaS, open source, MCP servers, apps, tools, APIs, or any product category.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- hassanzouhar/market_analyticstheir own version, first seen Sep 24, 2026
- jurgendn/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 17, 2026
- tansuasici/claude-research-kittheir own version, first seen Jun 2, 2026
- seandavi/scriptoriumtheir own version, first seen May 20, 2026
- 45ck/research-literature-review-skillstheir own version, first seen Mar 28, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- jurgendn/agent-skills★ 10same name
- seandavi/scriptorium★ 5same name
- 45ck/research-literature-review-skills★ 4same name
- tansuasici/claude-research-kit★ 4same name
- hassanzouhar/market_analytics★ 0same name
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 repository57 other files it gives its agents.
- autopilotSkill
- build-python-librarySkill
- build-temporalSkill
- canon-design-reviewSkill
- canon-pr-reviewSkill
- canon-reviewSkill
- ccr-modelsSkill
- ccr-runSkill
- chartSkill
- ci-health-reportSkill
- code-quality-trendsSkill
- competitive-matrixSkill
- councilSkill
- create-skillSkill
- deep-debug-ensemble-v1Skill
- deep-debugSkill
- deep-designSkill
- deep-ideaSkill
- deep-planSkill
- deep-qa-ensemble-v1Skill
- deep-qaSkill
- deep-researchSkill
- dependency-auditSkill
- deploy-status-reportSkill
- develop-board-gameSkill
- diagramSkill
- docxSkill
- dora-lite-reportSkill
- find-skillSkill
- flaky-test-diagnoserSkill
- gen-crash-testSkill
- gen-smokeSkill
- goal-managerSkill
- init-github-repoSkill
- loop-until-doneSkill
- magic-fetchSkill
- ml-pipeline-reportSkill
- monitorSkill
- napSkill
- pipeline-health-reportSkill
- platform-friction-detectorSkill
- pptxSkill
- prod-readinessSkill
- prompt-clash-ensembleSkill
- prompt-clashSkill
- retrospectSkill
- slack-digestSkill
- slidesSkill
- specSkill
- sprint-retroSkill
- tableSkill
- team-temporalSkill
- timelineSkill
- update-stop-gateSkill
- user-activity-reportSkill
- vc-gauntletSkill
- xlsxSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
5
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 37
Before delivering results, verify ALL:
- Distinctive: line 53
Search before you pitch: Never present an idea without first searching for existing implementations.
- Distinctive: line 55
Recurring pain or death: If the pain point occurs less than weekly for the target user, the idea is dead.
- Distinctive: line 56
Existing-solution-already-works is fatal: If a free, widely-adopted tool already solves this well enough, the idea is dead.
- Distinctive: line 60
Evidence over intuition: Every claim about market size, competitor count, or user demand must be backed by a search result or concrete data …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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
Gap Finder
Finds viable ideas through adversarial generation-and-kill cycles. Generates batches of 5, validates every idea against real market data, kills failures with documented reasons, and loops until survivors emerge.
Modes
- Batch (default) — broad generate-and-kill across a domain. Generates batches of 5, runs the 6-check kill chain on each, loops until 3 survivors emerge. Best for "give me side-project ideas", "what should I build", scanning many adjacent niches. This is the workflow below.
- Deep (
--deep) — exhaustive depth-first exploration of ONE space. Branches the market into opportunity tuples (market × wedge × unfair-advantage × why-now × who-pays), reality-calibrates each against real companies, maps named incumbents + GTM, runs an independent codex cross-attack and a mandatory steelman per node, then puts the top survivors through a VC-gauntlet fundability gate. Resumable via a JSON state file. Best for "find the real opportunities in X", "keep digging until you exhaust X". The full method lives in DEEP-DFS.md — read and follow it when--deepis passed, instead of the batch workflow below.
Workflow
- Establish the domain — identify the space the user wants ideas in (e.g., "MCP servers", "developer tools", "mobile apps for nurses"). Extract any constraints (tech stack, budget, solo founder, etc.) and previously killed ideas. Write these to a scratchpad file in the current working directory (
gap-finder-state.md). - Generate a batch of 5 ideas — each must be concrete and specific to the domain. Follow the idea template in GENERATION.md. Draw from at least 3 different angles per batch.
- Run the kill chain on every idea — execute all 6 validation checks from VALIDATION.md. Search the web for each check. Kill on first fatal failure.
- Record killed ideas — append every killed idea + specific kill reason to
gap-finder-state.md. This prevents re-proposing. - Present survivors — if any ideas survive all 6 checks, present them with full evidence. See SURVIVOR-FORMAT.md.
- Widen on saturation — if 2 consecutive batches have 0 survivors AND >80% died at Check 1 (competitors), the current sub-space is saturated. Do NOT stop. Instead: (a) note the saturated sub-space in state file, (b) expand the domain — go more niche, go adjacent, change the target user, change the business model, or combine two domains. Keep generating. The goal is survivors, not a saturation report.
- Loop until 3 survivors — go to step 2. There is no batch limit. Keep generating until 3 survivors are found. After every 5 dead batches, radically pivot: change the domain, the target user, the business model, or the geography. The answer exists — you haven't looked hard enough yet.
- Report survivors as they emerge — present each survivor immediately when it passes all 6 checks (don't wait for 3). After 3 survivors, write the final ranked summary.
Self-review checklist
Before delivering results, verify ALL:
- Every proposed idea was searched on at least 3 relevant sources (varies by domain — e.g., npm+Smithery+GitHub for dev tools, App Store+ProductHunt+Google for apps)
- Every killed idea has a specific, one-sentence kill reason (not "didn't seem viable")
- Every survivor has competitor search evidence showing < 2 direct competitors, or a clear differentiation from existing ones
- Every survivor answers "what recurring pain point does this solve?" with a concrete user scenario
- Every survivor has a realistic monetization or growth path described in one sentence
- No survivor is something trivially solved by existing free tools or LLMs without external data
- At least 3 batches were generated (15+ ideas evaluated)
- Each idea is specific (names concrete features/tools, not just a category)
- Killed ideas are tracked in gap-finder-state.md to prevent re-proposing
Golden rules
Hard rules. Never violate these.
- Search before you pitch. Never present an idea without first searching for existing implementations. Every idea gets 3+ web searches across relevant platforms. No exceptions. No "I believe there aren't competitors" — show the search results.
- Kill fast, document why. The moment an idea fails any validation check, kill it. Record the specific kill reason. Do not soften failures into "could work with modifications."
- Recurring pain or death. If the pain point occurs less than weekly for the target user, the idea is dead. Quarterly pain is not a business. Daily frustration is.
- Existing-solution-already-works is fatal. If a free, widely-adopted tool already solves this well enough, the idea is dead. "But ours would be slightly better" is not a gap — it's a feature request on the existing tool.
- Never stop until survivors are found. There is no batch limit. Keep generating and validating until 3 survivors emerge. No early exits. No "the market is saturated" conclusions. When obvious ideas die, get weirder. When a sub-space is crowded, move to an adjacent one. Parallelize validation across multiple agents when possible — each idea's kill chain is independent and can run concurrently.
- Concrete features, not categories. "A developer tool" is not an idea. "A CLI that takes a package.json and returns a dependency upgrade plan with breaking change warnings by cross-referencing changelogs" is an idea.
- No resurrections. Once an idea is killed, it stays dead. Do not re-propose killed ideas with minor variations. If "Postgres optimizer" is dead, "MySQL optimizer" dies for the same structural reason.
- Evidence over intuition. Every claim about market size, competitor count, or user demand must be backed by a search result or concrete data point. "I think developers would want this" is not evidence.
Reference files
| File | Contents |
| GENERATION.md | How to generate idea batches, the idea template, angle diversity requirements |
| VALIDATION.md | The 6-check kill chain with search strategies and pass/fail criteria |
| SURVIVOR-FORMAT.md | Output format for surviving ideas with required evidence sections |
| DEEP-DFS.md | --deep mode: the full DFS / tuple / codex-cross-attack / steelman / VC-gauntlet method |
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.

