v1.0.0 to v1.0.0

2 added, 2 removed. Audit A to A.

---

name: founder-report

- description: Founder-report packaging stage for the Diffmode growth-tactics pipeline — the post-gate step that turns the APPROVED synthesis.md (a reviewer-facing working paper) into growth-tactics.md, the founder-facing "Your Growth Tactics" report. Strict re-packaging per the central writing-style.md — plain tactic cards (what it is, why competitors can't copy it, how to start this week, time to first signal, what you need, kill it if) with ZERO pipeline plumbing — no vector IDs, no Pass labels, no pools, no numeric scores, no self-grading. Adds no new claims, numbers, tactics, or estimates — every sentence traceable to synthesis.md. Use after the synthesis build reviewer gate and before the HTML report render. Best-effort by design — if it fails, the report falls back to synthesis.md.

+ description: Founder-report packaging stage for the Diffmode growth-tactics pipeline — the post-gate step that turns the APPROVED synthesis.md (a reviewer-facing working paper) into growth-tactics.md, the founder-facing "Your Growth Tactics" report. Strict re-packaging per the central writing-style.md — plain tactic cards (what it is, why they won't see it coming, how to start this week, time to first signal, what you need, kill it if) with ZERO pipeline plumbing — no vector IDs, no Pass labels, no pools, no numeric scores, no self-grading. Adds no new claims, numbers, tactics, or estimates — every sentence traceable to synthesis.md. Use after the synthesis build reviewer gate and before the HTML report render. Best-effort by design — if it fails, the report falls back to synthesis.md.

metadata:

version: "1.0.0"

---

# Founder Report — package `synthesis.md` into "Your Growth Tactics"

`synthesis.md` is written to pass a reviewer: it carries disposition tables, traceability

lines, pool audits, and self-grades, because downstream checks parse them. That makes it a

**working paper**, not a deliverable. This stage derives the founder view: it reads the

APPROVED `synthesis.md` and re-packages the tactics into `growth-tactics.md` — the page the

founder actually opens first. `synthesis.md` itself is **never modified** (its structure is

a load-bearing contract with the reviewer and the orchestrator's checks).

## The one rule — re-package, never re-author

**Zero new content.** Every sentence in the output must be traceable to something

`synthesis.md` already says. Specifically:

- **No new claims, numbers, estimates, channels, or tactics.** If synthesis.md doesn't say

it, the report doesn't either.

- **Tactic count and names are preserved exactly** — same tactics, same order, same names —

minus bracket tags: strip the ` — [Pass 1 White Space]` / ` — [Pass 2 Synergy/Founder-Fit]`

origin labels from titles, and strip `[HIGH COMPLEXITY]` / `[LOW CONFIDENCE]` flags from

names. Where such a flag exists, say it in plain words inside the card instead (e.g. "this

is the heaviest lift in the set" under **What you need**).

- **Allowed transformations:** reorder, merge fields, strip labels and citations, split long

sentences, and simplify wording to meet `writing-style.md`. Nothing else.

## Inputs & Output

- `WS/03-think-tanks/demand-generation/synthesis.md` (PRIMARY — the APPROVED final

synthesis; read-only)

- `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/writing-style.md` (the voice contract — grade 6–8,

≤~20 words per sentence, banned-jargon table, the coffee test)

- **OUTPUT**: `WS/03-think-tanks/demand-generation/growth-tactics.md` (write no other files)

## Document skeleton (exactly these sections, in this order)

### 1. `# Your Growth Tactics`

A 2-3 sentence intro: what these tactics are, why they fit THIS founder (pull the budget /

team / stage facts from the Synthesis Overview's Constraint Summary), and how to use the

document (start with the quick wins, read each card before committing).

### 2. `## Start this week`

The tactics whose first signal arrives within ~4 weeks — take them from the Tactical

Clusters quick-wins group. One line each: the tactic name + what you'd do first. No card

detail here; the cards follow.

### 3. `## The tactics`

One card per tactic, in synthesis order. Heading: `### N. <Name>` (sequential number, plain

name, no bracket labels). Each card has **exactly these 7 fields, in this order**:

| Field | Built from (synthesis.md) | Rules |

|-------|---------------------------|-------|

| **What this is** | `In plain English` (+ `Emergent Mechanism` where it clarifies) | 1-3 short sentences; what you actually do |

- | **Why competitors can't copy it** | `Structural Advantage` (+ the competitive-adoption note from `Primary Channel(s)`) | strip taxonomy labels ("Type: …") — keep the plain reason and how long the edge lasts. KEEP competitor-adoption lines like "nobody in your market does this yet" |

+ | **Why they won't see it coming** | `Structural Advantage` (+ the competitive-adoption note from `Primary Channel(s)`) | lead with why competitors won't think of this themselves; strip taxonomy labels ("Type: …") — keep the plain structural reason and how long the edge lasts. KEEP competitor-adoption lines like "nobody in your market does this yet" |

| **How to start this week** | `How to Execute` steps, kept verbatim where they're already plain | fold in useful `Adapted to Your Constraints` context (e.g. "scaled down to fit your $500/month") |

| **Time to first signal** | `Expected Timeline & Success Metrics` | the early signal + when to expect it; strip any `(per …)` vector citations |

| **What you need** | `Required Resources` (+ `Skills Required` where it adds something) | time / budget / tools, in one or two lines |

| **Kill it if…** | the decision point in `Expected Timeline & Success Metrics` | the concrete number/date that says stop or double down |

| **Execute this** | derived from the tactic's first steps | 2-3 specific tools, skills, or templates that help execute the first steps — see rules below |

**"Execute this" rules.** This field is the ONE exception to the "zero new content" rule —

it names execution aids, not strategic claims. Scope it tightly:

- Name 2-3 concrete tools, agent skills, or templates that help the founder execute the

tactic's first steps. Match them to what the tactic actually involves:

- Outreach / cold email → the `cold-email` skill (coreyhaines31/marketingskills) or the

agent's built-in writing

- Copy / messaging → the `copywriting` skill or the agent's built-in writing

- Landing page / demo → v0.dev, the `free-tools` skill, or the agent's code generation

- Community / social → the `community-marketing` or `social` skill

- Content / SEO → the `content-strategy` or `ai-seo` skill

- Design / visual assets → Canva, Figma, or the agent's image generation

- Tracking / measurement → a simple spreadsheet with columns for the kill-signal metric

- Format as a short bulleted list: `→ <what>: <tool/skill name>`.

- Do NOT invent tactics, channels, or numbers here — only name execution tools.

- If the tactic is purely manual (e.g. "walk into 10 coffee shops"), say

`→ No tools needed — this is a shoes-on-the-ground play.`

### 4. `## What to avoid`

From the Anti-Portfolio. Per item: why founders try it, why it fails for THIS founder, and

what to do instead (point at the relevant card by number). No severity labels, no

"anti-pattern" vocabulary — just plain warnings.

### 5. `## How to sequence these`

The timeline clusters in plain words (this week / this month / the long game), then the

Top 5 as "if you only run five, run these" — each with a **one-line plain reason** taken

from what synthesis.md already says about it (fit, speed, the edge). **No numeric scores

anywhere** — the founder gets reasons, not grades.

### 6. `## Where these came from`

One short paragraph: these tactics were built by combining growth mechanisms mined from

real, public case studies during this run, and checked against this founder's budget, team,

and stage; the reason they're defensible is that copying them would force a bigger

competitor to work in a way their structure doesn't allow. Then point the curious reader at

the two working papers in the same report: **How These Were Built** (the mechanism

combinations) and **Tactic Engineering Notes** (the full engineering write-up, scores and

traceability included). This must be the LAST section.

## Banned in the output (deterministic — the orchestrator greps for these)

The orchestrator rejects the output if any of these appear. Self-grep before returning:

| Banned | Why |

|--------|-----|

| `Pass 1` / `Pass 2` | pipeline phase labels |

| `must_include` | constraints plumbing |

| `Pool A` / `Pool B` | constraints plumbing |

| `white space` / `white-space` (any case) | pipeline vocabulary |

| `growth-factors.json` | internal file name |

| `PASS` / `FAIL` self-grading | the founder report doesn't grade itself |

| `/10` or `/50` scores | no numeric scores in the founder view |

| "anti-pattern" (any case) | jargon; say what to avoid in plain words |

Plus everything `writing-style.md` already bans (leverage, optimize, arbitrage, …).

## Self-check (before returning)

- [ ] Card count under `## The tactics` == the number of `### Tactic #N` blocks in

synthesis.md, same order, same names (minus bracket tags).

- [ ] Every card has all 7 fields, in the listed order (including "Execute this").

- [ ] Banned-pattern grep over the output is empty.

- [ ] The document's last section is `## Where these came from`.

- [ ] Voice: grade 6–8, ≤~20 words per sentence, passes the coffee test, no banned jargon —

per `writing-style.md`.

- [ ] Spot-check 2-3 cards: every sentence traces to the matching tactic in synthesis.md —

no invented numbers, channels, or steps.

This stage is **best-effort by design**: if it can't produce a clean output, the pipeline

ships `synthesis.md` as the main page (old behavior). Never degrade `synthesis.md` to make

this stage pass.