本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

conducting-technical-due-diligence

Structures technology diligence with architecture review, code quality assessment, scalability analysis, and technical debt evaluation. Use when evaluating startup technology, assessing engineering teams, or reviewing technical infrastructure.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

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。

Conducting Technical Due Diligence

Structures technology diligence for venture and growth-stage investments, covering architecture review, code quality assessment, scalability analysis, technical debt quantification, and engineering team evaluation.

When To Use

  • Pre-term-sheet or post-term-sheet diligence on a software-intensive target company
  • Assessing a startup's technical infrastructure before seed, Series A, or later rounds
  • Evaluating acqui-hire candidates where engineering talent is the primary asset
  • Follow-on investment decisions where product has scaled since initial diligence
  • LP or co-investor requests for independent technical assessment

Inputs To Gather

  • Architecture artifacts: System diagrams, infrastructure-as-code repos, cloud provider dashboards (AWS/GCP/Azure), CI/CD pipeline configs
  • Codebase access: Primary repositories, commit history (12+ months preferred), branch/merge strategy documentation
  • Engineering org data: Team roster with tenure, hiring plan, reporting structure, attrition history
  • Operational metrics: Uptime/SLA history, incident post-mortems (last 12 months), deploy frequency, mean time to recovery (MTTR)
  • Product roadmap: Feature backlog, technical roadmap items vs. product-driven items, deferred maintenance list
  • Third-party dependencies: Vendor contracts, open-source license inventory, API integrations list
  • Security posture: Penetration test reports, SOC 2 / ISO 27001 status, vulnerability scan results [VERIFY: request NDA-gated reports directly from target]

Workflow

  1. Scope the engagement

    • Define diligence depth: lightweight (2–3 day review) vs. comprehensive (1–2 week deep dive)
    • Identify red-line issues specific to the deal thesis (e.g., "Can this platform handle 100x current load?" or "Is the ML model defensible IP?")
    • Establish data room access and NDA coverage for code review
  2. Architecture review

    • Map the system topology: monolith vs. microservices, data stores, message queues, external integrations
    • Assess cloud infrastructure design: redundancy, auto-scaling configuration, disaster recovery plan
    • Evaluate data architecture: schema design, data pipeline reliability, storage costs at projected scale
    • Flag single points of failure and vendor lock-in risks
  3. Code quality assessment

    • Review commit history for contribution patterns (bus factor), code review discipline, and merge hygiene
    • Analyze static analysis metrics: test coverage percentage, linting compliance, cyclomatic complexity
    • Sample-review critical modules (auth, payments, core business logic) for code clarity and correctness
    • Identify copy-paste duplication, dead code, and abandoned feature branches
  4. Scalability analysis

    • Review load testing results or request a load test against projected 12–24 month user growth
    • Evaluate database query performance at scale: indexing strategy, N+1 queries, read/write split architecture
    • Assess whether current infrastructure costs scale linearly or super-linearly with users
    • Identify architectural ceilings that would require a rewrite vs. incremental optimization
  5. Technical debt quantification

    • Catalog known debt items from issue trackers, tech-debt tags, and developer interviews
    • Estimate remediation cost in engineer-months for critical items
    • Classify debt as: (a) blocking scale, (b) increasing operational risk, (c) slowing velocity, or (d) cosmetic
    • Compare debt load against company stage — early-stage debt is expected; Series B+ debt warrants scrutiny
  6. Engineering team evaluation

    • Assess team composition: seniority distribution, specialization gaps, key-person dependencies
    • Review hiring pipeline and employer brand signals (Glassdoor, GitHub presence, conference talks)
    • Evaluate engineering culture indicators: documentation habits, on-call practices, blameless post-mortems
    • Benchmark compensation against market to assess retention risk [VERIFY: use current comp data for target geography]
  7. Security and compliance review

    • Verify authentication/authorization implementation (OAuth, RBAC, token management)
    • Check secrets management practices (no hardcoded credentials, proper vault usage)
    • Review open-source license compliance — flag copyleft licenses in proprietary distribution paths [VERIFY: license obligations depend on distribution model]
    • Assess data privacy controls relative to applicable regulations (GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA if applicable) [VERIFY: regulatory scope depends on target's markets and data types]

Output

Structure the technical diligence report with:

  • Executive summary: 1-page investment-grade overview with go/no-go recommendation and confidence level
  • Risk matrix: Categorize findings as Critical / High / Medium / Low with estimated remediation effort
  • Architecture scorecard: Rate each domain (infrastructure, data, security, scalability, code quality) on a standardized scale (e.g., 1–5)
  • Technical debt ledger: Itemized list with severity, estimated fix cost, and business impact if unaddressed
  • Team assessment: Strengths, gaps, and key-person risk summary
  • Deal-specific answers: Direct responses to the red-line questions defined in scoping
  • Recommended post-close actions: Prioritized technical initiatives for the first 90 days if the investment proceeds

Quality Checks

  • Every critical finding is supported by specific evidence (code snippets, metrics, configuration references) — no unsupported assertions
  • Scalability claims are grounded in load test data or architecture analysis, not founder assertions
  • Technical debt estimates use engineer-month units with stated assumptions about team productivity
  • Security findings reference specific CWE/OWASP categories where applicable
  • The report distinguishes between stage-appropriate trade-offs and genuinely concerning deficiencies
  • All jurisdiction-dependent or regulation-dependent findings are marked with [VERIFY]
  • The executive summary is understandable by non-technical investment partners

レビュー

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。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Evaluates activist investor campaigns with thesis assessment, proposed changes, and likely outcome analysis. Use when analyzing activist situations, evaluating campaign theses, or assessing activist track records.

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。

CaseMark/skills442026年9月9日 更新

Evaluates corporate vulnerability to shareholder activism with governance assessment, valuation gaps, and operational improvement opportunities. Use when assessing activist risk, identifying vulnerabilities, or preparing defensive analyses.

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。

CaseMark/skills442026年9月9日 更新

Evaluates bolt-on acquisitions for existing platforms with strategic fit, synergy quantification, and return contribution analysis. Use when screening add-on targets, building platform acquisition strategies, or modeling tuck-in economics.

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。

CaseMark/skills442026年9月9日 更新

Evaluates signal half-life, turnover implications, and capacity constraints for systematic alpha factors. Use when analyzing signal persistence, evaluating factor decay, or estimating strategy capacity.

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。

CaseMark/skills442026年9月9日 更新

Evaluates alternative data sources including satellite, NLP sentiment, web scraping, and geolocation for alpha signal generation. Use when analyzing alt data, evaluating new data sources, or integrating non-traditional signals.

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。

CaseMark/skills442026年9月9日 更新

Evaluates competition law exposure with market definition, HHI analysis, and remedy estimation for proposed transactions. Use when assessing merger clearance risk, analyzing market concentration, or preparing HSR filings.

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。

CaseMark/skills442026年9月9日 更新

CaseMark のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する