466aa13a7b
* feat: C-Suite expansion — 8 new executive advisory roles Add COO, CPO, CMO, CFO, CRO, CISO, CHRO advisors and Executive Mentor. Expands C-level advisory from 2 to 10 roles with 74 total files. Each role includes: - SKILL.md (lean, <5KB, ~1200 tokens for context efficiency) - Reference docs (loaded on demand, not at startup) - Python analysis scripts (stdlib only, runnable CLI) Executive Mentor features /em: slash commands (challenge, board-prep, hard-call, stress-test, postmortem) with devil's advocate agent. 21 Python tools, 24 reference frameworks, 28,379 total lines. All SKILL.md files combined: ~17K tokens (8.5% of 200K context window). Badge: 88 → 116 skills * feat: C-Suite orchestration layer + 18 complementary skills ORCHESTRATION (new): - cs-onboard: Founder interview → company-context.md - chief-of-staff: Routing, synthesis, inter-agent orchestration - board-meeting: 6-phase multi-agent deliberation protocol - decision-logger: Two-layer memory (raw transcripts + approved decisions) - agent-protocol: Inter-agent invocation with loop prevention - context-engine: Company context loading + anonymization CROSS-CUTTING CAPABILITIES (new): - board-deck-builder: Board/investor update assembly - scenario-war-room: Cascading multi-variable what-if modeling - competitive-intel: Systematic competitor tracking + battlecards - org-health-diagnostic: Cross-functional health scoring (8 dimensions) - ma-playbook: M&A strategy (acquiring + being acquired) - intl-expansion: International market entry frameworks CULTURE & COLLABORATION (new): - culture-architect: Values → behaviors, culture code, health assessment - company-os: EOS/Scaling Up operating system selection + implementation - founder-coach: Founder development, delegation, blind spots - strategic-alignment: Strategy cascade, silo detection, alignment scoring - change-management: ADKAR-based change rollout framework - internal-narrative: One story across employees/investors/customers UPGRADES TO EXISTING ROLES: - All 10 roles get reasoning technique directives - All 10 roles get company-context.md integration - All 10 roles get board meeting isolation rules - CEO gets stage-adaptive temporal horizons (seed→C) Key design decisions: - Two-layer memory prevents hallucinated consensus from rejected ideas - Phase 2 isolation: agents think independently before cross-examination - Executive Mentor (The Critic) sees all perspectives, others don't - 25 Python tools total (stdlib only, no dependencies) 52 new files, 10 modified, 10,862 new lines. Total C-suite ecosystem: 134 files, 39,131 lines. * fix: connect all dots — Chief of Staff routes to all 28 skills - Added complementary skills registry to routing-matrix.md - Chief of Staff SKILL.md now lists all 28 skills in ecosystem - Added integration tables to scenario-war-room and competitive-intel - Badge: 116 → 134 skills - README: C-Level Advisory count 10 → 28 Quality audit passed: ✅ All 10 roles: company-context, reasoning, isolation, invocation ✅ All 6 phases in board meeting ✅ Two-layer memory with DO_NOT_RESURFACE ✅ Loop prevention (no self-invoke, max depth 2, no circular) ✅ All /em: commands present ✅ All complementary skills cross-reference roles ✅ Chief of Staff routes to every skill in ecosystem * refactor: CEO + CTO advisors upgraded to C-suite parity Both roles now match the structural standard of all new roles: - CEO: 11.7KB → 6.8KB SKILL.md (heavy content stays in references) - CTO: 10KB → 7.2KB SKILL.md (heavy content stays in references) Added to both: - Integration table (who they work with and when) - Key diagnostic questions - Structured metrics dashboard table - Consistent section ordering (Keywords → Quick Start → Responsibilities → Questions → Metrics → Red Flags → Integration → Reasoning → Context) CEO additions: - Stage-adaptive temporal horizons (seed=3m/6m/12m → B+=1y/3y/5y) - Cross-references to culture-architect and board-deck-builder CTO additions: - Key Questions section (7 diagnostic questions) - Structured metrics table (DORA + debt + team + architecture + cost) - Cross-references to all peer roles All 10 roles now pass structural parity: ✅ Keywords ✅ QuickStart ✅ Questions ✅ Metrics ✅ RedFlags ✅ Integration * feat: add proactive triggers + output artifacts to all 10 roles Every C-suite role now specifies: - Proactive Triggers: 'surface these without being asked' — context-driven early warnings that make advisors proactive, not reactive - Output Artifacts: concrete deliverables per request type (what you ask → what you get) CEO: runway alerts, board prep triggers, strategy review nudges CTO: deploy frequency monitoring, tech debt thresholds, bus factor flags COO: blocker detection, scaling threshold warnings, cadence gaps CPO: retention curve monitoring, portfolio dog detection, research gaps CMO: CAC trend monitoring, positioning gaps, budget staleness CFO: runway forecasting, burn multiple alerts, scenario planning gaps CRO: NRR monitoring, pipeline coverage, pricing review triggers CISO: audit overdue alerts, compliance gaps, vendor risk CHRO: retention risk, comp band gaps, org scaling thresholds Executive Mentor: board prep triggers, groupthink detection, hard call surfacing This transforms the C-suite from reactive advisors into proactive partners. * feat: User Communication Standard — structured output for all roles Defines 3 output formats in agent-protocol/SKILL.md: 1. Standard Output: Bottom Line → What → Why → How to Act → Risks → Your Decision 2. Proactive Alert: What I Noticed → Why It Matters → Action → Urgency (🔴🟡⚪) 3. Board Meeting: Decision Required → Perspectives → Agree/Disagree → Critic → Action Items 10 non-negotiable rules: - Bottom line first, always - Results and decisions only (no process narration) - What + Why + How for every finding - Actions have owners and deadlines ('we should consider' is banned) - Decisions framed as options with trade-offs - Founder is the highest authority — roles recommend, founder decides - Risks are concrete (if X → Y, costs $Z) - Max 5 bullets per section - No jargon without explanation - Silence over fabricated updates All 10 roles reference this standard. Chief of Staff enforces it as a quality gate. Board meeting Phase 4 uses the Board Meeting Output format. * feat: Internal Quality Loop — verification before delivery No role presents to the founder without passing verification: Step 1: Self-Verification (every role, every time) - Source attribution: where did each data point come from? - Assumption audit: [VERIFIED] vs [ASSUMED] tags on every finding - Confidence scoring: 🟢 high / 🟡 medium / 🔴 low per finding - Contradiction check against company-context + decision log - 'So what?' test: every finding needs a business consequence Step 2: Peer Verification (cross-functional) - Financial claims → CFO validates math - Revenue projections → CRO validates pipeline backing - Technical feasibility → CTO validates - People/hiring impact → CHRO validates - Skip for single-domain, low-stakes questions Step 3: Critic Pre-Screen (high-stakes only) - Irreversible decisions, >20% runway impact, strategy changes - Executive Mentor finds weakest point before founder sees it - Suspicious consensus triggers mandatory pre-screen Step 4: Course Correction (after founder feedback) - Approve → log + assign actions - Modify → re-verify changed parts - Reject → DO_NOT_RESURFACE + learn why - 30/60/90 day post-decision review Board meeting contributions now require self-verified format with confidence tags and source attribution on every finding. * fix: resolve PR review issues 1, 4, and minor observation Issue 1: c-level-advisor/CLAUDE.md — completely rewritten - Was: 2 skills (CEO, CTO only), dated Nov 2025 - Now: full 28-skill ecosystem map with architecture diagram, all roles/orchestration/cross-cutting/culture skills listed, design decisions, integration with other domains Issue 4: Root CLAUDE.md — updated all stale counts - 87 → 134 skills across all 3 references - C-Level: 2 → 33 (10 roles + 5 mentor commands + 18 complementary) - Tool count: 160+ → 185+ - Reference count: 200+ → 250+ Minor observation: Documented plugin.json convention - Explained in c-level-advisor/CLAUDE.md that only executive-mentor has plugin.json because only it has slash commands (/em: namespace) - Other skills are invoked by name through Chief of Staff or directly Also fixed: README.md 88+ → 134 in two places (first line + skills section) * fix: update all plugin/index registrations for 28-skill C-suite 1. c-level-advisor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json — v2.0.0 - Was: 2 skills, generic description - Now: all 28 skills listed with descriptions, all 25 scripts, namespace 'cs', full ecosystem description 2. .codex/skills-index.json — added 18 complementary skills - Was: 10 roles only - Now: 28 total c-level entries (10 roles + 6 orchestration + 6 cross-cutting + 6 culture) - Each with full description for skill discovery 3. .claude-plugin/marketplace.json — updated c-level-skills entry - Was: generic 2-skill description - Now: v2.0.0, full 28-skill ecosystem description, skills_count: 28, scripts_count: 25 * feat: add root SKILL.md for c-level-advisor ClawHub package --------- Co-authored-by: Leo <leo@openclaw.ai>
6.9 KiB
/em:hard-call — Framework for Decisions With No Good Options
Command: /em:hard-call <decision>
For the decisions that keep you up at 3am. Firing a co-founder. Laying off 20% of the team. Killing a product that customers love. Pivoting. Shutting down.
These decisions don't have a right answer. They have a less wrong answer. This framework helps you find it.
Why These Decisions Are Hard
Not because the data is unclear. Often, the data is clear. They're hard because:
- Real people are affected — someone loses a job, a relationship ends, a team is hurt
- You've been avoiding the decision — which means the problem is already worse than it was
- Irreversibility — unlike most business decisions, you can't undo this easily
- You have skin in the game — your judgment about the right call is clouded by your feelings about it
The longer you avoid a hard call, the worse the situation usually gets. The company that needed a 10% cut 6 months ago now needs a 25% cut. The co-founder conversation that should have happened at month 4 is happening at month 14.
Most hard decisions are late decisions.
The Framework
Step 1: The Reversibility Test
The most important question first: can you undo this?
- Reversible — try it, learn, adjust (fire the vendor, kill the feature, change the strategy)
- Partially reversible — painful to undo but possible (restructure, change co-founder roles)
- Irreversible — cannot be undone (layoff a person, shut down a product with customer lock-in, close a legal entity)
For irreversible decisions, the bar for certainty is higher. You must do more due diligence before acting. Not because you might be wrong — but because you can't take it back.
If you're treating a reversible decision like it's irreversible, you're avoiding it.
Step 2: The 10/10/10 Framework
Ask three questions about each option:
- 10 minutes from now: How will you feel immediately after making this decision?
- 10 months from now: What will the impact be? Will the problem be solved?
- 10 years from now: When you look back, will this have been the right call?
The 10-minute feeling is usually the least reliable guide. The 10-year view usually clarifies what the right call actually is.
Most hard decisions look obvious at 10 years. The question is whether you can tolerate the 10-minute pain.
Step 3: The Andy Grove Test
Andy Grove's test for strategic decisions: "If we got replaced tomorrow and a new CEO came in, what would they do?"
A fresh set of eyes, no emotional investment in the current path, no sunk cost. What's the obvious right call from the outside?
If the answer is clear to an outsider, the question becomes: why haven't you done it yet?
Step 4: Stakeholder Impact Mapping
For each option, map who's affected and how:
| Stakeholder | Option A Impact | Option B Impact | Their reaction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Affected employees | |||
| Remaining team | |||
| Customers | |||
| Investors | |||
| You |
This isn't about finding the option that hurts nobody — there isn't one. It's about understanding the full picture before you decide.
Step 5: The Pre-Announcement Test
Before making the decision: write the announcement. The email to the team, the message to the customer, the conversation you'll have.
If you can't write that announcement, you're not ready to make the decision.
Writing it forces you to confront the reality of what you're doing. It also surfaces whether your reasoning holds under examination. "We're making this change because…" — does that sentence ring true?
Step 6: The Communication Plan
Hard decisions almost always get harder if communication is bad. The decision itself is not the only thing that matters — how it's done matters enormously.
For every hard call, plan:
- Who needs to know first (the person directly affected, before anyone else)
- How you'll tell them (in person when possible, never via email for personal impact)
- What you'll say (honest, direct, compassionate — see
references/hard_things.md) - What they can ask (be ready for every question)
- What comes next (give them a clear picture of what happens after)
Decision-Specific Frameworks
Firing a Co-Founder
See references/hard_things.md — Co-Founder Conflicts for full framework.
Key questions to answer first:
- Is this a performance problem or a values/culture problem? (Different conversations)
- Have you been explicit — not hinted, but direct — about the problem?
- What does the cap table look like and what are the legal implications?
- Is there a role that works better for them, or is this a full exit?
- Who needs to know (board, team, investors) and in what order?
The rule: If you've been thinking about this for more than 3 months, you already know the answer. The question is when, not whether.
Layoffs
Key questions:
- Is this a one-time reset or the beginning of a longer decline? (One reset is recoverable. Serial layoffs kill culture.)
- Are you cutting deep enough? (Insufficient layoffs are worse than no layoffs — two rounds destroys trust.)
- Who owns the announcement and is it direct and honest?
- What's the severance and is it fair?
- How do you prevent the best people from leaving after?
The rule: Cut once, cut deep, cut with dignity. Uncertainty is worse than clarity.
Pivoting
Key questions:
- Is this a true pivot (new direction) or an optimization (same direction, different tactic)?
- What are you keeping and what are you abandoning?
- Do you have evidence the new direction works, or are you running from failure?
- How do you tell current customers who bought the old vision?
- What does this do to the board's confidence?
The rule: Pivots should be pulled by evidence of new opportunity, not pushed by failure of the current path.
Killing a Product Line
Key questions:
- What happens to customers currently using it?
- What's the migration path?
- What do the people who built it do?
- Is "kill it" the right call or is "sell it" or "spin it out" better?
- What's the narrative — internally and externally?
The Avoiding-It Test
You know you've been avoiding a hard call if:
- You've thought about it every week for more than a month
- You're hoping the situation will "resolve itself"
- You're waiting for more data that you'll never feel is enough
- You've had the conversation in your head many times but not in real life
- Other people around you have noticed the problem
The cost of delay is almost always higher than the cost of the decision.
Every month you wait, the problem compounds. The co-founder who's not working out becomes more entrenched. The product line that needs to die consumes more resources. The person who needs to be let go affects the people around them.
Make the call. Make it clearly. Make it with dignity.