This skill should be used to shape a feature into a written spec before any code. Trigger when the user says "shape this", "write a pitch", "spec this out", "let's plan <feature>", or starts non-trivial work without an agreed approach. Produces a Shape Up style pitch (the source of truth) via interview.
Scanned 8/30/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add GiustoPiedimonte/agentic-engineering-marketplace --skill pitch --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Pitch?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/giustopiedimonte-pitch)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: pitch
description: >
This skill should be used to shape a feature into a written spec before any
code. Trigger when the user says "shape this", "write a pitch", "spec this
out", "let's plan <feature>", or starts non-trivial work without an agreed
approach. Produces a Shape Up style pitch (the source of truth) via interview.
metadata:
version: "0.2.0"
---
# /pitch — shape the spec before the code
A pitch is the **source of truth** for a piece of work: it captures the problem,
the appetite, the shaped solution, and the boundaries. Code is downstream. Never
go prompt -> code for non-trivial work; shape first.
`$ARGUMENTS` is a short description of the feature/problem.
## Process
1. **Interview the user** with the `AskUserQuestion` tool. Skip obvious
questions; dig into the hard parts they may not have considered:
- The problem: what's broken / missing, for whom, why now.
- Appetite: how much time/effort this is worth (this bounds the solution).
- The shape of the solution at a high level (not implementation detail).
- Explicit out-of-scope and hard no-gos.
- Rabbit holes: the risky unknowns, and how to de-risk them.
- "Done-when": the concrete checklist that closes the work.
Ask in short rounds. One question at a time when possible.
2. **Ground it in the codebase** (read-only). Delegate wide reading to the
`researcher` subagent so the main context stays clean. Inventory what already
exists ("substrate already present") so the pitch builds on it, not over it.
3. **Name the graph.** State which of the five graphs this work touches (execution
/ memory / audit / capability / coordination — usually one primary) and which
edges cross a human gate or an irreversible action (the severity×reversibility
calls). If the work is a fan-out / audit / review / research job, sketch the
nodes and edges — see the `graph` skill's `GRAPH_MODEL.md`. This makes the gate
question explicit before any code, not after.
4. **Write the pitch** to `docs/pitches/<slug>.md` using the structure in
`references/PITCH_TEMPLATE.md` (including the `Graph` and `Gated edges` fields).
The pitch must be self-contained: name the files/interfaces involved, state
what's out of scope, and end with a "Done-when" checklist that includes an
end-to-end verification.
5. **Stop for review.** Show the pitch, ask for gaps/corrections. Do not start
planning or coding until the user approves. Fix the shape, not the code.
Lifecycle convention: active pitches live in `docs/pitches/` (keep WIP low,
ideally 1). On completion they move to `docs/pitches/done/` with a link to the
PR. Parked work goes to `docs/pitches/parked/`.
Time spent making the pitch precise pays off more than time spent watching the
implementation. When in doubt, ask rather than assume.

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!