* 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>
7.6 KiB
Interview Craft Guide
Deep operational guide for conducting the /cs:setup founder interview. Not a script — a thinking tool. Read before every interview. Internalize it, then put it away.
The Core Problem
Most context-gathering fails because it captures what founders say, not what they mean. Founders are practiced storytellers. They have investor pitches, board narratives, team rallies. They tell good stories. Your job is to get past the story to what's actually true — and to do it without making them feel interrogated.
The best interview doesn't feel like an interview. It feels like a conversation with a smart advisor who gets it.
Before You Start
Set the frame:
"This isn't a quiz. There are no right answers. I'm trying to understand your company well enough that every piece of advice I give you is actually useful — not generic. The more honest you are, the more useful this gets. Nothing leaves this conversation."
Then shut up and let them talk.
Reading the Room
Pay attention to:
- Energy shifts. Where do they speed up? What makes them lean in? That's what they care about. What makes them vague or flat? That's where the real issue lives.
- What they lead with. The first thing they mention unprompted is usually the most important thing to them.
- Repetition. If a topic comes up twice, it's significant. Three times and it's the real problem.
- Hedging language. "We're pretty much aligned on..." / "Things are mostly fine..." / "It's not really a problem yet..." — probe these. "Pretty much" is doing a lot of work there.
- Skips. When a dimension lands with no energy, they're either guarded or it's genuinely not a priority. Figure out which.
Follow-Up Probe Library
When the answer is vague
- "Can you give me a specific example?"
- "What does that look like on a Tuesday morning?"
- "If I asked your co-founder / direct report, what would they say?"
- "How would you know if that was actually true?"
When the answer is suspiciously polished
- "That's the investor version — what's the version you'd tell your co-founder at 11pm?"
- "If that's true, what explains [specific contradicting data point]?"
- "What would a skeptic say about that?"
When they skip something
- "You moved past [topic] quickly — is that because it's not a problem, or because it's too big to get into?"
- "Come back to [topic] — tell me more about that."
When they say "everything is fine"
- "What's the thing that keeps you up at night even though you know you shouldn't worry about it?"
- "If something was going to surprise you in a bad way in the next 90 days, what would it be?"
- "What would your board member who's most worried about the company say?"
When they're guarded
- Slow down. Don't push harder — push softer.
- "You don't have to share numbers if you're not comfortable — ranges are fine."
- Acknowledge the complexity: "This stuff is genuinely hard to talk about."
- Share back first: "A lot of founders at this stage struggle with X — is that something you recognize?"
When they go long
Let them run for a bit. Then: "Let me make sure I captured what matters here — is it that [summary]?" It helps you confirm understanding and signals you're tracking.
Red Flag Patterns and What to Do
"We have no real competition."
Red flag: They're either in a genuinely new market (rare) or they've defined competition too narrowly (common). Probe: "What would someone do today if your product didn't exist? Who benefits if you fail?"
"Our values are X, Y, Z."
Red flag: If they come out immediately and cleanly, they're probably from the website. Probe: "Tell me about a time you had to actually enforce one of those values — when it cost something."
"The team is great. Everyone's aligned."
Red flag: Either they've built something exceptional, or they're not seeing the tensions. Probe: "What's the last thing you disagreed with someone on the team about? How did it go?"
"I don't really have blind spots."
Red flag: Everyone has blind spots. Founders who can't name theirs are the most dangerous. Probe: "What would your co-founder say if I asked them what you should stop doing?" Or: "When you look back on hard moments in this company, what's the pattern of what you got wrong?"
"Revenue is good, things are growing."
Red flag: "Good" is not a number. Probe: "Give me a range — is this $100K ARR, $1M, $10M? I'm not sharing it anywhere."
"We just need more customers."
Red flag: This is almost never the root problem. Probe: "What's driving the growth you have? Why aren't more customers finding you, or converting, or staying?"
Capturing Implicit Context
The most valuable context is often what they don't say. Document it.
Capture in the "Key Themes & Implicit Signals" section:
- What they mentioned first (reveals priority)
- What they glossed over (reveals avoidance or comfort)
- Where the energy was (reveals passion vs obligation)
- What they contradicted between dimensions (reveals gaps)
- The adjective they used most often (reveals self-perception)
Examples of implicit signals:
- Founder talks about product with energy, team with fatigue → probably underinvested in people management
- Mission sounds borrowed, not owned → founder-market fit risk
- Strong on vision, weak on operational specifics → execution gap
- Detailed on competition, vague on advantage → defensive posture, not confident in differentiation
- Runway question answered precisely → financially aware. Answered vaguely → either worried or detached.
Handling Reluctant Founders
Some founders are guarded. Usually for one of three reasons:
- They don't trust you yet. Give it time. Ask easier questions first. Build rapport.
- They're in denial. Something is wrong and they're not ready to say it. Circles around topics, comes back to them.
- They're protecting someone. A co-founder, investor, or key employee is the real problem and they won't name them.
Tactics:
- Give them an out: "You don't have to answer this specifically — just give me the shape of it."
- Normalize the problem: "A lot of founders at this stage are dealing with X..."
- Ask about others: "What advice would you give a founder in your exact situation?"
- Come back later: If they shut down a dimension, note it and return after trust is built.
After the Interview
Before generating the file:
- Read back your notes. Find the 3–5 most important things. They should be in the output.
- Identify the biggest gap — what's the thing they didn't say that the questions should have surfaced?
- Synthesize tensions — where did what they said in one dimension contradict another?
- Write the Watch List — what needs to be re-checked in 90 days?
Then generate the context file. The last section — "Key Themes & Implicit Signals" — is the most important one. Don't skip it.
Quality Check
Before finishing, ask yourself:
- Could the C-suite advisors give specific advice based on this context?
- Does this capture what's real vs what's aspirational?
- Is the Watch List honest about what's uncertain or worrying?
- Does the founder profile feel like a real person, not a LinkedIn bio?
- Did I capture implicit signals, not just explicit answers?
If any answer is no, go back and fill it in.
The One-Sentence Version
Your job is to understand this company well enough that every advisor response feels like it came from someone who's been in the room for six months — not someone who just read the website.