business-brainstorm v0.4.0A

Immutable. This exact content never changes and is served at /api/v1/blob/6e7404ddc3f5dd09.

---
name: business-brainstorm
description: "When you want to pressure-test a potential new business, product, or side project against the serial-founder filter. Not \"marketing ideas for a product\" (that's marketing-skills:marketing-ideas) — this is \"should this business exist + can you win it.\" Runs the idea through a structured framework (problem, audience, wedge, monetization, moat, portfolio fit, distribution, energy fit, opportunity cost), checks domain availability via /domain, optionally triggers /deep-research for market validation, and outputs a viability brief: build / sleep on it / pass. Archives every idea to ~/.config/makerskills/business-brainstorm/archive/ so past work is searchable. Triggers on \"/business-brainstorm,\" \"/brainstorm,\" \"new business idea,\" \"should I build X,\" \"pressure test this idea,\" \"validate this idea,\" \"is X a good business,\" \"what about a [type] for [audience].\""
metadata:
  version: 0.4.0
---

# /business-brainstorm — Pressure-test a business idea

Takes a vague idea, runs it through the user's filter, and outputs a structured viability brief. Composes with `deep-research` (for market) and `/domain` (for naming).

## Step 1 — Capture the idea

Get from the user:
- The idea in 1–2 sentences (the *what*)
- The reason it's on their mind (the *why now*)
- Any starting context (a chat where this came up, a tweet that inspired it, a problem they've hit)

**Resume first.** Look in the archive dir (Step 7) for files whose first line starts with `<!-- in-progress`. If one matches this idea, offer to pick it up: read it, keep every settled score, and continue from the next unscored dimension.

If they point at a past chat / doc, load it first. Memory has `project_*.md` files for in-flight projects — check there before assuming the idea is brand-new.

If the idea is too vague to score, ask 1–2 clarifying questions and stop. Don't pad the brief with assumptions.

Two more cases where scoring would be theater:
- **Validation-seeking** ("just tell me it's good," "hype me up") — name it kindly: *"I'll run it, but a brief that can't say Pass is worthless. Still in?"* Proceed only on those terms.
- **Already committed** (built, launched, money spent) — this isn't "should it exist" anymore. Offer `decide` for the next call (keep going / pivot / stop) instead.

## Step 2 — Load the framework + personal overlay

Read `references/framework.md` — the user's filter. Apply each dimension in order.

Also try to load `${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/business-brainstorm/portfolio.local.md` if it exists — this is where the user lists their real in-flight businesses, properties, audiences, and partners. When present, use it for the "portfolio fit," "distribution," and "opportunity cost" dimensions instead of asking the user to name each one.

## Step 3 — Score each dimension

For each of the 9 dimensions in `framework.md`, give a 1-line take + a verdict (✅ strong / 🟡 OK / ❌ weak / ❓ unknown — needs research).

Don't BS the unknowns. Mark them ❓ and route to deep-research in Step 4.

**Write the working file before the first score.** Run Step 7's migration check, then create the brief file (path in Step 7, template in Step 6) with the idea, why-now, and an empty Score table, and this as its first line:

```markdown
<!-- in-progress · scored: 0/9 · next: <dimension> -->
```

As each dimension settles, fill its row and update the marker. If the session dies, the next one resumes from the file. Don't touch `INDEX.md` until Step 7.

Where a dimension depends on something only the user knows (their audience access, energy, what this displaces), ask — one dimension at a time — rather than guessing. Then **hold the bar** on what they say:

- **Hopes don't score.** "People want it," "we'll figure out distribution," "should be easy to build" — stay on it, offer 1–2 sharper candidate answers or ask for one piece of evidence (a waitlist, a request, a competitor's revenue). Still mush after two pushes → ❓, or ❌ where `framework.md` names that exact cop-out as weak ("we'll do SEO," "we'll figure out monetization later"). Never 🟡. Quote the mush in the Take. A half-sharp answer (real price, hoped-for retention) scores on its weaker half.
- **Opposite Test for differentiation claims** — wherever they show up (usually the Wedge offer or Moat). Flip the claim. If the opposite is nonsense ("worse UX," "not AI-powered," "bad support"), the claim is fluff — demand the real choice underneath (e.g., "opinionated single workflow vs. flexible everything") before it can score ✅.
- **Threats are present tense.** "A big player *could* enter" is filler. "X launched this feature in March" is a threat. Only present-tense or clearly-likely threats count against Moat.

Warm framing, unmoved bar — attack the claim, never the person.

## Step 4 — Trigger research where needed (optional)

If 2+ dimensions are ❓ unknown, offer the user: *"Want me to run `/deep-research` on [topic] before scoring?"* At 3+ ❓ the framework says research first; if the user declines, write the brief with the ❓s visible — the verdict can't be Build.

Useful research targets:
- Market size / who pays signal → `last30days` skill (if installed) + web search
- Competitive landscape → search for "alternatives to X", "X vs Y" pages
- ICP signal → forums / Reddit / X where the audience hangs out
- Pricing benchmarks → look at competitor pricing pages

If the user says yes, run the `deep-research` skill on the topic and incorporate the brief.

## Step 5 — Check the .com

Always run `/domain` on the working name(s). A perfect idea with a $50k domain is a worse idea than a B+ idea with a free .com.

If naming is wide open, brainstorm 5–10 candidate names through `/domain` and report which are available.

## Step 6 — Output the brief

Use this template:

```markdown
# Business brainstorm: <name or idea slug>

**Date:** <YYYY-MM-DD>
**Idea:** <1–2 sentences>
**Why now:** <1 sentence>

## Verdict
**Build** / **Sleep on it** / **Pass** / **Steal an angle for [existing property]**

<2–3 sentence rationale>

## Score

| Dimension | Take | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Problem | … | ✅ |
| 2. Audience | … | 🟡 |
| 3. Wedge | … | ❓ |
| 4. Monetization | … | ✅ |
| 5. Moat | … | ❌ |
| 6. Portfolio fit | … | ✅ |
| 7. Distribution | … | ✅ |
| 8. Energy fit | … | 🟡 |
| 9. Opportunity cost | … | ❌ |

## Domain
- <name>.com — available / taken / aftermarket $<price>
- (other candidates if relevant)

## Research applied
- <link to deep-research brief in ~/.config/makerskills/deep-research/archive/, if run>

## Open questions
- <what would change the verdict>

## If you build it (sketch)
- **First 100 customers:** <how>
- **Wedge offer:** <what>
- **Price:** <range>
- **MVP scope:** <1–3 features>

## If you don't build it
- **Angle to steal for existing properties:**
  - Property A: …
  - Property B: …
  - Property C: …
  - (etc., only where relevant)
```

## Step 7 — Archive

Archives live in `${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/business-brainstorm/archive/` (create the directory if missing). Never write archives inside the skill's own folder — skill installs and upgrades re-sync from source and wipe anything saved there. **Migration:** if this skill's folder contains an old `references/ideas-archive/` with user entries, move those files into the archive directory first.

Finalize the working file at `<archive dir>/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md` (created in Step 3): fill every remaining section and **delete the `<!-- in-progress … -->` line**. Then append to `<archive dir>/INDEX.md` (create if missing):

```markdown
- 2026-06-16 — [<idea>](./<filename>.md) — **<verdict>** — <one-line rationale>
```

## Step 8 — Surface

Show the brief in chat. Tell the user the archive path. Offer:
- *"Want to push to Notion as a positioning canvas?"*
- *"Want me to scaffold a project repo / landing page?"* (if verdict = Build)
- *"Want me to revisit in 30 days?"* (if verdict = Sleep on it)

## Composes with

- `deep-research` — for market validation when dimensions are ❓
- `/domain` — for .com availability and naming brainstorm
- `/last30days` — for audience/market recency signal (via deep-research)
- Memory (`project_*.md`) — for portfolio context (don't pitch an idea that already exists)

## Notes on quality

- **Nine dimensions, not one hero metric.** Ideas fail because one dimension quietly rots even when the rest score high. Force each dimension to be scored — no "we'll figure that out later" cop-outs. A cop-out the user won't sharpen scores ❓, quoted, not 🟡.
- **A brainstorm that always says Build is lying.** The skill must be willing to land on Pass. If you're about to write Build on a table full of 🟡 and ❓, go back to Step 3.
- **Verdict discipline: Build / Sleep on it / Pass.** Not "maybe." Ambiguity in the verdict compounds into ambiguity in the commit; the brief exists to prevent that.
- **Portfolio-context check is non-negotiable.** Before writing, grep memory + wiki for existing property overlap. If the new idea is 80% one of your existing properties, propose extending the existing property instead of forking a new one — 4x cheaper to compound.
- **Archive every brief, even Passes.** Passed ideas resurface — the brief with rationale prevents re-litigating. The archive dir + INDEX.md makes revisit trivial.
- **"Angle to steal" section forces value from Passes.** Even ideas you won't build often have an angle that improves an existing property. Don't skip this section — it's the highest-leverage output of a Pass verdict.
- **30-day revisit for "Sleep on it."** Set the calendar reminder. Sleep-on-it ideas that never get revisited become dead weight in the archive; ideas that get revisited resurface with better context.