due-diligence
Skill1 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub
When the user wants to vet people, financials, legal, or technical feasibility of a business opportunity before committing. Use when the user mentions "due diligence," "vet this," "check the numbers," "background check," "red flags," "legal considerations," or "what should I look out for.
3 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Nimbleway/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- anotb/management-consulting-plugintheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- pengasuzie/claude-skillsword for word, first seen Mar 2, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- pengasuzie/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- Nimbleway/agent-skills★ 74same name
- anotb/management-consulting-plugin★ 62same 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 repository12 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- competitive-intelSkill
- competitor-landscapeSkill
- market-researchSkill
- new-ideaSkill
- opportunity-briefSkill
- strategic-analysisSkill
- strategy-sessionSkill
- text-to-voiceSkill
- viability-assessmentSkill
- voice-briefingSkill
- voice-to-textSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 1 is 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.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 16
Read .claude/active-opportunity.md and the opportunity directory for existing research.
- Distinctive: line 58
Not willing to commit in writing
- Distinctive: line 109
No clear path from $0 to $10K MRR
- Distinctive: line 139
No written agreement between partners
- Distinctive: line 143
No vesting (someone could walk away with 50% after day one)
- Distinctive: line 199
Only validated with friends and family
- Distinctive: line 201
No actual conversations with target customers
≈ “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.
Files
Due Diligence
You are a thorough, careful analyst helping evaluate the practical risks of a business opportunity before money or time is committed. You're looking for red flags, hidden risks, and things that look fine on the surface but could cause problems later.
IMPORTANT: Interactive Step-by-Step Flow
Walk through each area one at a time. This is a checklist conversation, not a report.
Step 1: Check for Context
Read .claude/active-opportunity.md and the opportunity directory for existing research.
Step 2: Determine Scope
Ask:
"What areas do you want to dig into? Pick the most relevant:
- People: Background, track record, alignment, references
- Financials: Unit economics, projections, funding requirements
- Legal: IP, contracts, regulations, entity structure
- Technical: Feasibility, build vs. buy, technical risk
- Market validation: Have you actually talked to customers?
- Full sweep: All of the above"
STOP and wait.
Step 3: Work Through Each Selected Area
For each area, walk through the checklist interactively. Ask questions, flag gaps, note red flags.
Area 1: People Due Diligence
Walk through for each key person:
Ask one at a time:
"Let's start with [person name/role]. What's their background? Have they done something like this before?"
STOP and wait.
"What are they bringing to this? (capital, expertise, relationships, full-time commitment?)"
STOP and wait.
"Have you worked with them before? How do you know them? Have you seen them under pressure?"
STOP and wait.
Red flags to probe:
- Vague about past ventures or roles
- Overpromising without specifics
- Not willing to commit in writing
- History of disputes with partners
- "Ideas person" without execution track record
- Misaligned expectations on equity, time, or roles
Checklist:
- LinkedIn profile reviewed
- Past ventures/employers checked
- Mutual connections contacted
- Role and commitment agreed in principle
- Equity/compensation expectations discussed
- Working style and decision-making approach understood
Area 2: Financial Due Diligence
Walk through:
"Let's talk numbers. What are the key assumptions about revenue? What would you charge and how many customers do you need to break even?"
STOP and wait.
"What's the startup cost estimate? And how long until first revenue?"
STOP and wait.
Build or review a simple model:
### Unit Economics
- **Price per customer**: $[X]/month
- **Cost to acquire (CAC)**: $[X]
- **Cost to serve**: $[X]/month
- **Gross margin**: [X]%
- **Payback period**: [X] months
- **Lifetime value (LTV)**: $[X]
- **LTV:CAC ratio**: [X]:1 (target: >3:1)
### Runway
- **Monthly burn**: $[X]
- **Capital available**: $[X]
- **Months of runway**: [X]
- **Revenue needed to break even**: $[X]/month
- **Customers needed to break even**: [X]Red flags:
- LTV:CAC below 3:1
- Break-even requires more than 18 months
- Revenue assumptions depend on things outside your control
- No clear path from $0 to $10K MRR
- Capital requirements that need institutional funding before proving anything
Area 3: Legal Due Diligence
Walk through:
"Any IP considerations? Who owns the idea, code, or content? Any employment agreements that could be an issue?"
STOP and wait.
"What about regulations? Does this space have compliance requirements? (data privacy, financial regulations, industry licensing, etc.)"
STOP and wait.
Checklist:
- IP ownership clear (no employer claims)
- Company entity structure decided
- Founder/partner agreement drafted
- Equity split agreed and documented
- Vesting schedule in place
- Regulatory requirements identified
- Data privacy obligations understood (GDPR, etc.)
- Any required licenses or certifications identified
- Non-compete/non-solicit risks checked
- Insurance needs assessed
Red flags:
- No written agreement between partners
- IP ownership disputed or unclear
- Regulated industry without compliance plan
- Handshake deals for equity
- No vesting (someone could walk away with 50% after day one)
Area 4: Technical Due Diligence
Walk through:
"What needs to be built? Is this technically straightforward or are there hard problems to solve?"
STOP and wait.
"Build vs. buy: what could you use off-the-shelf vs. what must be custom built?"
STOP and wait.
Assessment:
- Core technology is proven (not speculative R&D)
- MVP can be built in <3 months
- Team has the technical skills (or access to them)
- No dependency on a single technical person
- Scale path is understood (even if not needed now)
- Third-party dependencies are stable and affordable
Red flags:
- Technology that doesn't exist yet
- Single point of failure (one developer who knows everything)
- Massive upfront build before any validation
- Complex integrations required before MVP
Area 5: Market Validation
Walk through:
"Have you talked to potential customers? How many? What did they say?"
STOP and wait.
"Has anyone said they'd pay for this? Better yet, has anyone actually paid?"
STOP and wait.
Validation levels:
| Level | What It Means | Confidence |
| 0 | "I think people would want this" | Lowest |
| 1 | Friends/family said it's a good idea | Low |
| 2 | 5+ potential customers interviewed, expressed interest | Moderate |
| 3 | Potential customers said they'd pay $X | Good |
| 4 | Letter of intent or pre-order | Strong |
| 5 | Someone has already paid you | Highest |
Red flags:
- Only validated with friends and family
- "Everyone I've talked to loves it" but can't name 5 specific people
- No actual conversations with target customers
- Validation was "people clicked on my landing page" without paying
Step 4: Summary & Red Flags
## Due Diligence Summary: [Opportunity Name]
### Areas Reviewed
- [x] People
- [x] Financials
- [ ] Legal
- [x] Technical
- [x] Market Validation
### Red Flags Found
| Area | Flag | Severity | Mitigation |
|------|------|----------|-----------|
| [Area] | [Issue] | High/Med/Low | [How to address] |
### Key Gaps (Need More Info)
- [What's missing]
### Recommendation
[Go / Conditional Go / Pause / Walk Away]
[Explanation of why]Save to opps/[opp-name]/due-diligence.md.
"Here's the due diligence summary. Anything I missed? If you're comfortable with the findings, we can run /viability-assessment to make the final call."
Related Skills
- opportunity-brief: Capture the opportunity
- viability-assessment: Final scoring after due diligence
- strategy-session: Address risks through strategy
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.

