/founder-report

name: founder-report
description: Founder-report packaging stage for the Diffmode growth-tactics pipeline — the post-gate step that turns the APPROVED synthesis.md (a reviewer-facing working paper) into growth-tactics.md, the founder-facing "Your Growth Tactics" report. Strict re-packaging per the central writing-style.md — plain tactic cards (what it is, why they won't see it coming, how to start this week, time to first signal, what you need, kill it if) with ZERO pipeline plumbing — no vector IDs, no Pass labels, no pools, no numeric scores, no self-grading. Adds no new claims, numbers, tactics, or estimates — every sentence traceable to synthesis.md. Use after the synthesis build reviewer gate and before the HTML report render. Best-effort by design — if it fails, the report falls back to synthesis.md.
metadata:
  version: "1.0.0"

Founder Report — package `synthesis.md` into "Your Growth Tactics"

`synthesis.md` is written to pass a reviewer: it carries disposition tables, traceability lines, pool audits, and self-grades, because downstream checks parse them. That makes it a **working paper**, not a deliverable. This stage derives the founder view: it reads the APPROVED `synthesis.md` and re-packages the tactics into `growth-tactics.md` — the page the founder actually opens first. `synthesis.md` itself is **never modified** (its structure is a load-bearing contract with the reviewer and the orchestrator's checks).

The one rule — re-package, never re-author

**Zero new content.** Every sentence in the output must be traceable to something `synthesis.md` already says. Specifically:

• **No new claims, numbers, estimates, channels, or tactics.** If synthesis.md doesn't say

it, the report doesn't either.

• **Tactic count and names are preserved exactly** — same tactics, same order, same names —

minus bracket tags: strip the ` — [Pass 1 White Space]` / ` — [Pass 2 Synergy/Founder-Fit]` origin labels from titles, and strip `[HIGH COMPLEXITY]` / `[LOW CONFIDENCE]` flags from names. Where such a flag exists, say it in plain words inside the card instead (e.g. "this is the heaviest lift in the set" under **What you need**).

• **Allowed transformations:** reorder, merge fields, strip labels and citations, split long

sentences, and simplify wording to meet `writing-style.md`. Nothing else.

Inputs & Output

• `WS/03-think-tanks/demand-generation/synthesis.md` (PRIMARY — the APPROVED final

synthesis; read-only)

• `${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/writing-style.md` (the voice contract — grade 6–8,

≤~20 words per sentence, banned-jargon table, the coffee test)

• **OUTPUT**: `WS/03-think-tanks/demand-generation/growth-tactics.md` (write no other files)

Document skeleton (exactly these sections, in this order)

1. `# Your Growth Tactics`

A 2-3 sentence intro: what these tactics are, why they fit THIS founder (pull the budget / team / stage facts from the Synthesis Overview's Constraint Summary), and how to use the document (start with the quick wins, read each card before committing).

2. `## Start this week`

The tactics whose first signal arrives within ~4 weeks — take them from the Tactical Clusters quick-wins group. One line each: the tactic name + what you'd do first. No card detail here; the cards follow.

3. `## The tactics`

One card per tactic, in synthesis order. Heading: `### N. <Name>` (sequential number, plain name, no bracket labels). Each card has **exactly these 7 fields, in this order**:

| Field | Built from (synthesis.md) | Rules | |-------|---------------------------|-------| | **What this is** | `In plain English` (+ `Emergent Mechanism` where it clarifies) | 1-3 short sentences; what you actually do | | **Why they won't see it coming** | `Structural Advantage` (+ the competitive-adoption note from `Primary Channel(s)`) | lead with why competitors won't think of this themselves; strip taxonomy labels ("Type: …") — keep the plain structural reason and how long the edge lasts. KEEP competitor-adoption lines like "nobody in your market does this yet" | | **How to start this week** | `How to Execute` steps, kept verbatim where they're already plain | fold in useful `Adapted to Your Constraints` context (e.g. "scaled down to fit your $500/month") | | **Time to first signal** | `Expected Timeline & Success Metrics` | the early signal + when to expect it; strip any `(per …)` vector citations | | **What you need** | `Required Resources` (+ `Skills Required` where it adds something) | time / budget / tools, in one or two lines | | **Kill it if…** | the decision point in `Expected Timeline & Success Metrics` | the concrete number/date that says stop or double down | | **Execute this** | derived from the tactic's first steps | 2-3 specific tools, skills, or templates that help execute the first steps — see rules below |

**"Execute this" rules.** This field is the ONE exception to the "zero new content" rule — it names execution aids, not strategic claims. Scope it tightly:

• Name 2-3 concrete tools, agent skills, or templates that help the founder execute the

tactic's first steps. Match them to what the tactic actually involves:

• Outreach / cold email → the `cold-email` skill (coreyhaines31/marketingskills) or the

agent's built-in writing

• Copy / messaging → the `copywriting` skill or the agent's built-in writing
• Landing page / demo → v0.dev, the `free-tools` skill, or the agent's code generation
• Community / social → the `community-marketing` or `social` skill
• Content / SEO → the `content-strategy` or `ai-seo` skill
• Design / visual assets → Canva, Figma, or the agent's image generation
• Tracking / measurement → a simple spreadsheet with columns for the kill-signal metric
• Format as a short bulleted list: `→ <what>: <tool/skill name>`.
• Do NOT invent tactics, channels, or numbers here — only name execution tools.
• If the tactic is purely manual (e.g. "walk into 10 coffee shops"), say

`→ No tools needed —