/cs-grill-commercial
Matt Pocock-style docs-anchored grilling for a Commercial plan, deal, pricing decision, or forecast. Walks the user's plan against the SaaS pricing canon (Skok, Tunguz, Bessemer, Ramanujam, ProfitWell, Winning by Design) one question at a time, recommends an answer per question,
$ npx -y skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this command gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfClaude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/cs-grill-commercial
Context preview
What this command does when you run it.
Matt Pocock-style docs-anchored grilling for a Commercial plan, deal, pricing decision, or forecast. Walks the user's plan against the SaaS pricing canon (Skok, Tunguz, Bessemer, Ramanujam, ProfitWell, Winning by Design) one question at a time, recommends an answer per question,
Command definition
cs-grill-commercial.mddescription: Matt Pocock-style docs-anchored grilling for a Commercial plan, deal, pricing decision, or forecast. Walks the user's plan against the SaaS pricing canon (Skok, Tunguz, Bessemer, Ramanujam, ProfitWell, Winning by Design) one question at a time, recommends an answer per question, and refuses to invoke any sub-skill until the lane-defining decisions are locked. Use before running /cs:commercial on a fuzzy plan.
argument-hint: "<plan, deal, pricing question, or fuzzy commercial problem>"
/cs:grill-commercial — Commercial grill against the SaaS pricing canon
Apply Matt Pocock's `grill-with-docs` discipline to this Commercial plan / problem:
**$ARGUMENTS**
Five rules (preserved from Matt Pocock, MIT)
1. **One question per turn.** Never bundle. 2. **Recommend an answer with each question.** 3. **Explore the workspace before asking** — check for deal records, pricing comps, RFP docs, MSA redlines. 4. **Walk depth-first.** 5. **Track dependencies** — pricing → packaging → deal → forecast.
The Commercial decision tree (depth-first)
Branch 1 — Which lane?
- PRICING / DEAL / PARTNERSHIP / CHANNEL_ECON / POLICY / RFP / FORECAST
Branch 2 — The forcing question per lane
**PRICING:** "Is your customer paying for outcomes, seats, or usage?" Recommended: outcomes (value-based) if you can measure them; usage if marginal cost is variable; seats only if usage is roughly flat per user. Canon: Ramanujam 2016 *Monetizing Innovation* (the 9-mistake list). Anti-pattern: seat-based on a usage-variable product caps TAM at ~20% of WTP.
**DEAL:** "What's the gross margin at full discount, AND what does next quarter's pipeline look like at the same terms?" Recommended: model both. Refuse to approve until reps can articulate the precedent risk. Canon: Skok (For Entrepreneurs — discount math), Tunguz benchmarks. Anti-pattern: one 40% precedent reshapes 3 quarters of pipeline.
**PARTNERSHIP:** "Does the partner have independent demand, or are they reselling our pipeline?" Recommended: insist on independent-demand evidence (named accounts the partner sourced, not co-sold). Canon: Forrester channel research. Anti-pattern: channel-led deals from your own pipeline cost more than direct.
**CHANNEL_ECON:** "What's your fully-loaded cost-to-serve direct vs partner?" Recommended: model both with allocated overhead. Canon: Bessemer State of the Cloud channel benchmarks.
**POLICY:** "Is your current discount matrix backed by data, or by precedent?" Recommended: data — discount band vs. win rate vs. NRR. Canon: OpenView discount studies.
**RFP:** "Do you have proof points for each requirement, or are you writing aspirational claims?" Recommended: proof points only. Refuse to invent claims. Canon: APMP (Association of Proposal Management Professionals).
**FORECAST:** "Are you using stage-conversion from the last 4 quarters, or the last 12?" Recommended: last 4, weighted toward most recent. Canon: Skok, OpenView. Anti-pattern: 12-month equal-weight hides recent slowdown.
Branch 3 — Reversibility check
"If this commercial decision lands and we want to roll it back in 90 days, what does it cost?" Hard-to-reverse + surprising + real trade-off → ADR per Matt's grill-with-docs criteria.
Branch 4 — Approval chain
"Who is the human approver on the output?" Recommended: named role + named person, not "the team".
Branch 5 — Now invoke the sub-skill
Only after branches 1-4 are locked, invoke `/cs:commercial` with the synthesized inquiry.
Output format per turn
Q[i]/[total]: [precise question]
Recommended: [answer + canon-cited rationale]
(Confirm, or override?)
Stop conditions
- All branches resolved → invoke `/cs:commercial <synthesized>`
- User says "stop grilling, just run it" → invoke with whatever's resolved, flag unresolved branches in digest
- User abandons → no sub-skill, save partial grill to `commercial-grill-{timestamp}.md`
Distinct from
- `engineering/grill-me` (Matt Pocock) — generic
- `engineering/grill-with-docs` (Matt Pocock) — codebase + ADR-anchored for engineering. This is **Commercial-domain grilling** against the SaaS pricing canon.
- `/cs:commercial` — **executes** routing. This **interrogates** first.
Read more
description: Matt Pocock-style docs-anchored grilling for a Commercial plan, deal, pricing decision, or forecast. Walks the user's plan against the SaaS pricing canon (Skok, Tunguz, Bessemer, Ramanujam, ProfitWell, Winning by Design) one question at a time, recommends an answer per question, and refuses to invoke any sub-skill until the lane-defining decisions are locked. Use before running /cs:commercial on a fuzzy plan. argument-hint: "<plan, deal, pricing question, or fuzzy commercial problem>"
/cs:grill-commercial — Commercial grill against the SaaS pricing canon
Apply Matt Pocock's `grill-with-docs` discipline to this Commercial plan / problem:
**$ARGUMENTS**
Five rules (preserved from Matt Pocock, MIT)
1. **One question per turn.** Never bundle. 2. **Recommend an answer with each question.** 3. **Explore the workspace before asking** — check for deal records, pricing comps, RFP docs, MSA redlines. 4. **Walk depth-first.** 5. **Track dependencies** — pricing → packaging → deal → forecast.
The Commercial decision tree (depth-first)
Branch 1 — Which lane?
- PRICING / DEAL / PARTNERSHIP / CHANNEL_ECON / POLICY / RFP / FORECAST
Branch 2 — The forcing question per lane
**PRICING:** "Is your customer paying for outcomes, seats, or usage?" Recommended: outcomes (value-based) if you can measure them; usage if marginal cost is variable; seats only if usage is roughly flat per user. Canon: Ramanujam 2016 *Monetizing Innovation* (the 9-mistake list). Anti-pattern: seat-based on a usage-variable product caps TAM at ~20% of WTP.
**DEAL:** "What's the gross margin at full discount, AND what does next quarter's pipeline look like at the same terms?" Recommended: model both. Refuse to approve until reps can articulate the precedent risk. Canon: Skok (For Entrepreneurs — discount math), Tunguz benchmarks. Anti-pattern: one 40% precedent reshapes 3 quarters of pipeline.
**PARTNERSHIP:** "Does the partner have independent demand, or are they reselling our pipeline?" Recommended: insist on independent-demand evidence (named accounts the partner sourced, not co-sold). Canon: Forrester channel research. Anti-pattern: channel-led deals from your own pipeline cost more than direct.
**CHANNEL_ECON:** "What's your fully-loaded cost-to-serve direct vs partner?" Recommended: model both with allocated overhead. Canon: Bessemer State of the Cloud channel benchmarks.
**POLICY:** "Is your current discount matrix backed by data, or by precedent?" Recommended: data — discount band vs. win rate vs. NRR. Canon: OpenView discount studies.
**RFP:** "Do you have proof points for each requirement, or are you writing aspirational claims?" Recommended: proof points only. Refuse to invent claims. Canon: APMP (Association of Proposal Management Professionals).
**FORECAST:** "Are you using stage-conversion from the last 4 quarters, or the last 12?" Recommended: last 4, weighted toward most recent. Canon: Skok, OpenView. Anti-pattern: 12-month equal-weight hides recent slowdown.
Branch 3 — Reversibility check
"If this commercial decision lands and we want to roll it back in 90 days, what does it cost?" Hard-to-reverse + surprising + real trade-off → ADR per Matt's grill-with-docs criteria.
Branch 4 — Approval chain
"Who is the human approver on the output?" Recommended: named role + named person, not "the team".
Branch 5 — Now invoke the sub-skill
Only after branches 1-4 are locked, invoke `/cs:commercial` with the synthesized inquiry.
Output format per turn
Q[i]/[total]: [precise question] Recommended: [answer + canon-cited rationale] (Confirm, or override?)
Stop conditions
- All branches resolved → invoke `/cs:commercial <synthesized>`
- User says "stop grilling, just run it" → invoke with whatever's resolved, flag unresolved branches in digest
- User abandons → no sub-skill, save partial grill to `commercial-grill-{timestamp}.md`
Distinct from
- `engineering/grill-me` (Matt Pocock) — generic
- `engineering/grill-with-docs` (Matt Pocock) — codebase + ADR-anchored for engineering. This is **Commercial-domain grilling** against the SaaS pricing canon.
- `/cs:commercial` — **executes** routing. This **interrogates** first.
362 production-ready Claude Code skills, plugins, and agent skills for 13 AI coding tools. The most comprehensive open-source library of Claude Code skills and agent plugins — also works with OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, and 9 more coding agents.
Repo: alirezarezvani/claude-skills
Other commands on claude-skills.
- /focused-fix
Deep-dive feature repair — systematically fix an entire feature/module across all its files and dependencies. Usage: /focused-fix <feature-path>
Open command - /clean
Clean up merged branches locally and on remote, keeping only main, dev, and gh-pages.
Open command - /cm
Stage working tree changes and create a Conventional Commit (no push).
Open command - /cp
Stage, commit, and push the current branch following git governance rules.
Open command - /pr
Create a pull request from the current branch.
Open command - /plugin-audit
Comprehensive audit pipeline for skills, plugins, agents, and commands. Validates structure, quality, security, marketplace compliance, cross-platform compatibility, and ecosystem integration. Runs all built-in validation tools, invokes domain-appropriate agents for code review,
Open command

