agentleFS
pengasuziepengasuzie/claude-code-starter/.claude/skills/due-diligence/SKILL.md

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

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
  1. Very specific:

    Read .claude/active-opportunity.md and the opportunity directory for existing research.

    line 16
  2. Distinctive:

    Not willing to commit in writing

    line 58
  3. Distinctive:

    No clear path from $0 to $10K MRR

    line 109
  4. Distinctive:

    No written agreement between partners

    line 139
  5. Distinctive:

    No vesting (someone could walk away with 50% after day one)

    line 143
  6. Distinctive:

    Only validated with friends and family

    line 199
  7. Distinctive:

    No actual conversations with target customers

    line 201

≈ “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.

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

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:

  1. People: Background, track record, alignment, references
  2. Financials: Unit economics, projections, funding requirements
  3. Legal: IP, contracts, regulations, entity structure
  4. Technical: Feasibility, build vs. buy, technical risk
  5. Market validation: Have you actually talked to customers?
  6. 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:

LevelWhat It MeansConfidence
0"I think people would want this"Lowest
1Friends/family said it's a good ideaLow
25+ potential customers interviewed, expressed interestModerate
3Potential customers said they'd pay $XGood
4Letter of intent or pre-orderStrong
5Someone has already paid youHighest

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

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.