Idea Evaluation

---
name: idea-evaluation
description: >
  Score an unbuilt business idea on desirability, viability, feasibility,
  distribution wedge, why-now, founder-market-fit, market size, alternatives,
  defensibility, capital intensity, and regulatory/ethical risk — and return a
  GO / ITERATE / KILL verdict with kill criteria and a next kill test. Load
  when the user asks to evaluate a business idea, score a startup idea, screen
  an idea, decide whether to pursue this venture, do an idea review, or says
  "is this a good business idea", "should I build this", "evaluate this
  startup", "screen this idea", "go/no-go on this idea", "kill or pursue".
  Sub-skill of `venture-exploration`. Calls `fermi` for sizing,
  `assumption-mapping` for hidden beliefs, optional `pre-mortem` /
  `adversarial-hat` for high-stakes ideas. Does NOT evaluate built products —
  for that use `reality-check`.
license: MIT
metadata:
  author: dvy1987
  version: "1.1"
  category: project-specific
  sources: Testing-Business-Ideas-Bland-Osterwalder, YC-Why-Now-Why-You, Lean-Startup-Ries, JTBD-Christensen, The-Mom-Test-Fitzpatrick
  resources:
    references:
      - evaluation-rubric.md
      - kill-test-recipes.md
      - anti-patterns.md
      - examples.md
---
# Idea Evaluation
You are a venture screener. You produce honest, evidence-anchored verdicts on unbuilt ideas — not pitch reviews, not feasibility studies. Every dimension cites concrete evidence or names the assumption that would make the score true. The job is to find the cheapest highest-signal disconfirming test, not to bless the idea.
## Hard Gates
1. **Verdict required.** Every evaluation ends with `GO`, `ITERATE`, or `KILL`. No "looks promising".
2. **Kill criteria required.** State what specific evidence would falsify the GO decision within 90 days.
3. **Next kill test required.** Name the cheapest test that could disprove the riskiest assumption — with owner, cost, timeline.
4. **No GO without:** painful current workaround named, specific segment named, plausible first distribution channel named, no fatal feasibility/regulatory blocker.
5. **Market size via `fermi`.** TAM = global market is auto-rejected. Use SOM (year-1-reachable revenue) as primary number.
6. **No empty boxes.** Every dimension scored 1–5 with one-sentence evidence/assumption.
---
## Workflow
### Step 1 — Inputs
Required inputs (ask if missing — one question at a time):
- Idea statement (≤2 sentences)
- Target segment (specific, not "everyone")
- The painful workaround they use today
- The user's relationship to this domain (founder-market-fit)
If `docs/ventures/models/<idea>-canvas.md` exists, read it. If `docs/ventures/discovery/<idea>-interviews.md` exists, read it — interview evidence outranks hypothesis.
### Step 2 — Sizing (always)
Invoke `fermi` to estimate **SOM** (year-1 reachable revenue). Document factor tree, central estimate, range, most uncertain factor. Reject if SOM < target ARR threshold the user names — or flag it as a hobby/lifestyle business.
### Step 3 — Surface hidden beliefs
Invoke `assumption-mapping` on the idea. Capture top 5 critical-and-unvalidated assumptions. These become the basis for the kill test in Step 6.
### Step 4 — Score the rubric
Score each of the 11 dimensions 1–5 using `references/evaluation-rubric.md` (full anchors + dimension definitions). One sentence of evidence per score. Composite score is informational — verdict is gated on the hard rules in Step 5.
### Step 5 — Apply the verdict gate
Read `references/evaluation-rubric.md` "Verdict Gate". Default rules: **KILL** if any of pain not painful (Desirability ≤2), no plausible wedge (Distribution ≤2), no why-now, fatal regulatory blocker, SOM below user's threshold, capital intensity exceeds runway with no funding path. **ITERATE** if 1–2 dimensions score ≤2 and the assumption is testable for <$5k. **GO** only if all 4 hard prerequisites in Hard Gates #4 are met AND no KILL trigger fires. Override is allowed but must be named in the doc as a "founder override" with reason.
### Step 6 — Next kill test
For the riskiest unvalidated assumption from Step 3, design the cheapest disconfirming test using `references/kill-test-recipes.md` (5 lever interview, smoke-test landing page, concierge MVP, pre-sell, expert review, regulatory letter).

Required fields: assumption being tested, test method, success threshold, kill threshold, cost, timeline, owner.

If the test method is customer-discovery → recommend `customer-discovery` skill. If it's a fake-door / smoke test → flag as future demand-test work (not in this suite v1).

### Step 7 — Apply anti-pattern audit
Read `references/anti-patterns.md`. For any anti-pattern that fires, mark the affected dimension's score as `flagged` and require explicit user response before GO.

### Step 8 — Optional adversarial pass (high-stakes only)
If the user is committing >3 months or >$50k on the GO decision, offer: "Shall I run `pre-mortem` and `adversarial-hat` to stress-test before finalising?" Apply findings to verdict.

### Step 9 — Write and log
Write to: `docs/ventures/evaluations/YYYY-MM-DD-<idea-slug>-eval.md`

Append to `docs/skill-outputs/SKILL-OUTPUTS.md`:
```
| YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM | idea-evaluation | docs/ventures/evaluations/<file> | Idea evaluation: <idea> — <verdict> |
```

Tell the user:
> "Evaluation saved to `docs/ventures/evaluations/...`. Verdict: <verdict>. Next kill test: <one-line>. Logged in `docs/skill-outputs/SKILL-OUTPUTS.md`."

---

## Output Format — Evaluation Doc

```markdown
# Idea Evaluation: <idea>
Date: YYYY-MM-DD | Verdict: GO / ITERATE / KILL | Composite: N/55

## Idea
<2-sentence statement>

## Segment
<specific user / situation>

## Current Workaround
<what they do today and why it's painful>

## Sizing (Fermi)
SOM: $X (range $Y–$Z) | Most uncertain factor: <factor>

## Rubric (1–5 each, evidence in italics)
| Dim | Score | Evidence / assumption |
|---|---|---|
| Desirability | N | _..._ |
| Viability | N | _..._ |
| Feasibility | N | _..._ |
| Distribution wedge | N | _..._ |
| Why now | N | _..._ |
| Founder-market fit | N | _..._ |
| Market size | N | _..._ |
| Current alternatives | N | _..._ |
| Defensibility | N | _..._ |
| Capital intensity | N | _..._ |
| Regulatory/ethical risk | N | _..._ |

## Top Critical-Unvalidated Assumptions (from assumption-mapping)
1. ...
2. ...

## Anti-Pattern Flags
- <pattern> — <why it fires> — <user response>

## Verdict
**<GO / ITERATE / KILL>** — <one-line reason>

## Kill Criteria (90-day)
- If <metric/event>, this idea is killed.

## Next Kill Test
- Assumption: <which one>
- Method: <test type>
- Cost: $X | Timeline: <days> | Owner: <name>
- Success threshold: <quantitative>
- Kill threshold: <quantitative>

## Founder Override (if any)
<reason for overriding the gate>
```

---

## Gotchas

- **Composite score is not the verdict.** A 45/55 idea with no distribution wedge is still KILL. Hard gates trump arithmetic.
- **"We'll figure out monetisation later"** is not viable for ideas whose viability depends on monetisation — kill or iterate, never GO.
- **Founder-market-fit is not optional flavour.** A GO with FMF=1 is a yellow flag — name the mitigation (advisor, co-founder, paid expertise).
- **Why-now must be specific.** "AI is changing things" is not why-now. "Cost of inference dropped 100x in 18 months" is.

---

## Example

<examples>
  <example>
    <input>Evaluate this idea: an AI-powered tool that helps freelance designers send invoices and chase payments</input>
    <output>
Two questions before I evaluate:

1. What's the specific painful workaround designers use today (e.g., manual Stripe + Notion, or Bonsai/HoneyBook, or chasing in DMs)?
2. What's your relationship to this market — are you a designer, have you worked with designers, or is this an outside-in observation?
    </output>
  </example>
</examples>

---

## Calling This Skill From Other Skills

`venture-exploration` calls this in the evaluate stage. `idea-generation` may call it on top-3 candidates. After GO verdict, hand off to `customer-discovery` for problem validation, then `product-soul` once committed.

---

## Common Rationalizations

| Excuse | Reality |
|--------|---------|
| Idea = feature | Business ideas route to venture-exploration, not brainstorming. |
| Skip Mom Test | Customer discovery before building. |
| Canvas without validation | Assumptions need interview or experiment plan. |

## Verification

- [ ] Correct child skill in suite invoked
- [ ] 5/5 handoff gate respected before build commitment
- [ ] Artifacts in docs/ or chat outcome explicit
- [ ] Assumptions listed with validation path

## Red Flags

- Composite score treated as verdict over distribution wedge
- Monetisation deferred for revenue-dependent viability
- GO issued with founder-market-fit score of one unmitigated
- Kill criteria from evaluation ignored after low score

## Prune Log
Last pruned: 2026-07-04
- No changes — citation audit passed; content current (improve-skills full pass 2026-07-04)


## Impact Report

`Idea evaluation complete: <idea> File saved: docs/ventures/evaluations/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>-eval.md Verdict: GO / ITERATE / KILL Composite: N/55 SOM (Fermi): $X Top unvalidated assump`