saas-idea-validator
Evaluates a software or startup idea against problem, market, competition, monetization, defensibility, and execution, and returns a verdict rather than encouragement. Use this when an idea needs pressure-testing before anyone builds, when deciding whether something is worth pursuing, when assessing competition or willingness to pay, or when a validated idea needs a first-customers and MVP plan. Default to scrutiny; the useful answer is usually the unwelcome one.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cbrock84/headcount /tmp/saas-idea-validator && cp -r /tmp/saas-idea-validator/plugins/executive/skills/saas-idea-validator ~/.claude/skills/saas-idea-validatorSKILL.md
# SaaS idea validator Most ideas fail for reasons visible before any code is written. Finding them costs an hour; not finding them costs a year. ## Interrogate in this order **Problem.** Who has it, how often, and what does it cost them today? An idea survives this only if you can name a specific person and what they currently do instead. "Businesses struggle with X" is not a problem statement — it is a category. The strongest signal is a **workaround**: someone has built a spreadsheet, hired a contractor, or strung tools together to survive this. Paid workarounds are validated demand. **Market.** Who exactly, and how many, and can you reach them? A large market you cannot address cheaply is smaller than a narrow one you can. Ask specifically: where do these people already gather, and what would it cost to reach a hundred of them this month? **Competition.** Established competitors are usually good news — they prove budget exists. The dangerous answers are "nobody is doing this" (usually because it does not work or nobody pays) and "everybody is doing this" with no differentiation. Name the actual alternative, including doing nothing and using a spreadsheet, which win far more often than competitors do. **Monetization.** Who pays, how much, and out of which budget? Products die between "useful" and "someone has a line item for it." If the buyer and the user are different people, that is a different and harder business. **Defensibility.** What stops a competitor copying this in a quarter? Features are not a moat. Data, switching costs, network effects, distribution, and regulatory position are. **Execution.** Can *this* team build and sell it? Distribution is more often the binding constraint than engineering, and it is more often the one nobody has thought about. ## The verdict Give one. "It depends" is an evasion. - **Pursue** — what to validate first, and the cheapest test. - **Pursue if** — the specific condition that must hold, and how to check it. - **Reframe** — the adjacent idea that is stronger, and why. - **Do not pursue** — the reason, stated once, without softening. ## Red flags Any one of these should lower the verdict materially, and several together are usually fatal: - The problem is described in terms of the solution, and the founder cannot state it without mentioning their product. - Nobody currently pays anything to solve it, including in labor. - The stated advantage is "better UX" or "AI-powered" with nothing structural underneath. - The buyer is "everyone," or the segment widened when challenged. - Revenue depends on a platform whose terms could change unilaterally. - The founder has not spoken to ten prospective customers, and has a reason why not. ## The investor lens Whether or not you are raising, the question is clarifying: could this plausibly become large, and what would have to be true? - **What does this look like at scale** — same motion at ten times the volume, or a different business? - **Where does growth come from once the obvious channel saturates?** Most plans have exactly one channel and no answer. - **What is the wedge and what is the expansion?** A narrow entry point is a strength only if there is somewhere to go from it. - **Why has nobody done this?** Usually there is a reason. Find it before assuming you spotted something others missed. ## When it survives The first job is not building. It is finding ten people with the problem who will say what they do today and what they would pay. If ten cannot be found in a fortnight, the reachability answer above was wrong. Then the smallest thing that delivers the value once, manually if necessary. A concierge version that works beats an automated version that might. ## Never - Score an idea favorably because the person is invested in it. - Accept "there's no competition" without checking what people do instead. - Recommend building before anyone has said they would pay.
Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.
Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.
Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.
Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.
Optimizes for AI assistants and AI-generated answers — being retrievable, being cited, and being represented accurately when a model answers on your behalf. Use this when traffic is shifting from links to AI answers, when a brand is misrepresented or absent in AI responses, when planning content for retrieval rather than ranking, or when deciding how AI search changes an existing SEO program.
Improves visibility and conversion in the App Store and Google Play — metadata, keywords, screenshots, ratings, and the listing experience that turns an impression into an install. Use this to audit or optimize an app listing, plan a launch listing, diagnose poor install conversion, or improve store search visibility.
Protects and restores data — backup coverage and scope, retention, immutability against ransomware, and proving restores actually work. Use this to design a backup regime, verify restores, plan retention, protect backups from ransomware, or recover from data loss.
Runs the planning cycle — annual budget, rolling forecast, consolidation of business unit inputs, and the variance analysis that explains actuals against plan. Use this to build or challenge a budget, run a forecast cycle, consolidate departmental submissions, explain why results diverged from plan, or improve forecast accuracy.