Founder onboarding interview that captures company context across 7 dimensions. Invoke with /cs:setup for initial interview or /cs:update for quarterly refresh. Generates ~/.claude/company-context.md used by all C-suite advisor skills. Use when setting up the C-suite advisors for the first time, or when company context is missing or more than 90 days old — e.g. after a fundraise or pivot.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Structured founder interview that builds the company context file powering every C-suite advisor. One 45-minute conversation. Persistent context across all roles.
/cs:setup — Full onboarding interview (~45 min, 7 dimensions)/cs:update — Quarterly refresh (~15 min, "what changed?")cs:setup, cs:update, company context, founder interview, onboarding, company profile, c-suite setup, advisor setup
Be a conversation, not an interrogation. Ask one question at a time. Follow threads. Reflect back: "So the real issue sounds like X — is that right?" Watch for what they skip — that's where the real story lives. Never read a list of questions.
Open with: "Tell me about the company in your own words — what are you building and why does it matter?"
Capture: what they do, who it's for, the real founding "why," one-sentence pitch, non-negotiable values. Key probe: "What's a value you'd fire someone over violating?" Red flag: Values that sound like marketing copy.
Capture: headcount (FT vs contractors), revenue range, runway, stage (pre-PMF / scaling / optimizing), what broke in last 90 days. Key probe: "If you had to label your stage — still finding PMF, scaling what works, or optimizing?"
Capture: self-identified superpower, acknowledged blind spots, archetype (product/sales/technical/operator), what actually keeps them up at night. Key probe: "What would your co-founder say you should stop doing?" Red flag: No blind spots, or weakness framed as a strength.
Capture: team in 3 words, last real conflict and resolution, which values are real vs aspirational, strongest and weakest leader. Key probe: "Which of your stated values is most real? Which is a poster on the wall?" Red flag: "We have no conflict."
Capture: who's winning and why (honest version), real unfair advantage, the one competitive move that could hurt them. Key probe: "What's your real unfair advantage — not the investor version?" Red flag: "We have no real competition."
Capture: priority stack-rank across product/growth/people/money/operations, the decision they've been avoiding, the "one extra day" answer. Key probe: "What's the decision you've been putting off for weeks?" Note: The "extra day" answer reveals true priorities.
Capture: 12-month target (specific), 36-month target (directional), exit vs build-forever orientation, personal success definition. Key probe: "What does success look like for you personally — separate from the company?"
After the interview, generate ~/.claude/company-context.md using templates/company-context-template.md.
Fill every section. Write [not captured] for unknowns — never leave blank. Add timestamp, mark as fresh.
Tell the founder: "I've captured everything in your company context. Every advisor will use this to give specific, relevant advice. Run /cs:update in 90 days to keep it current."
Trigger: Every 90 days or after a major change. Duration: ~15 minutes.
Open with: "It's been [X time] since we did your company context. What's changed?"
Walk each dimension with one "what changed?" question:
Update the context file, refresh timestamp, reset to fresh.
~/.claude/company-context.md — single source of truth for all C-suite skills. Do not move it. Do not create duplicates.
templates/company-context-template.md — blank template for outputreferences/interview-guide.md — deep interview craft: probes, red flags, handling reluctant foundersまだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Accessibility audit skill for scanning, fixing, and verifying WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA compliance across React, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and plain HTML codebases. Use when auditing accessibility, fixing a11y violations, checking color contrast, generating compliance reports, or integrating accessibility checks into CI/CD pipelines.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user needs to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative for paid advertising. Use when they say 'write ad copy,' 'generate headlines,' 'create ad variations,' 'bulk creative,' 'iterate on ads,' 'ad copy validation,' 'RSA headlines,' 'Meta ad copy,' 'LinkedIn ad,' or 'creative testing.' This is pure creative production — distinct from paid-ads (campaign strategy). Use ad-creative when you need the copy, not the campaign plan.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Adversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) skill — optimize content to be cited by AI language models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Mistral) as authoritative sources. Distinct from SEO — AEO optimizes for citation in LLM-generated responses, not search rankings. Use when planning content for AI-first search audiences, auditing existing content for E-E-A-T signals, tracking which pages get cited by which LLMs, or building a citation-friendly content strategy. Triggers — 'AEO audit', 'optimize for ChatGPT', 'get cited by Perplexity', 'LLM citation strategy', 'answer engine optimization', 'content for AI search', 'E-E-A-T audit'. Output is a markdown audit report (default) or JSON for pipeline integration. Stdlib-only Python tools.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Mint a tamper-evident, post-quantum-signed receipt for a consequential agent action (deploy, delete, pay, grant-access, model decision) so it can be verified later from the certificate alone. Use when an autonomous agent takes a side-effecting action that may need to be proven later, or when satisfying EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping. Three decisions: whether an action needs a receipt, minting it, verifying it. Signing is delegated to the open-source OpenAgentOntology package. Not after-the-fact log analysis; not a hosted notary; not a legal opinion.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。