/tool-foundation-sprint-magic-lenses

name: tool-foundation-sprint-magic-lenses
description: Day 2 afternoon move of a Foundation Sprint. Evaluates the candidate approach set through multiple lenses (4 classic plus at least 1 custom) to surface trade-offs, identify consistent winners and contradictions, and produce a top bet plus a backup plan. Use after Approach Options is signed. Lens scoring is a sense-making tool, not mathematical truth; arbitrary precision is a smell.
license: Apache-2.0
metadata:
  classification: tool
  version: "1.0.0"
  updated: 2026-07-04
  tool: foundation-sprint
  move: magic-lenses
  category: validation
  frameworks:
    - foundation-sprint
    - click
    - character-note-and-vote
  timebox_minutes: 105
  roles:
    - facilitator
    - decider
    - pm
  prerequisites:
    - tool-foundation-sprint-approach-options
  inputs:
    - approach summaries
    - team-specific custom lenses
  outputs:
    - classic lens charts (customer, pragmatic, growth, money)
    - custom lens charts
    - pattern review
    - top bet
    - backup plan
    - decision rationale
  author: product-on-purpose

<!-- PM-Skills | https://github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills | Apache 2.0 -->

Foundation Sprint Magic Lenses

Day 2 afternoon of a Foundation Sprint. The team evaluates each candidate approach from multiple perspectives, surfaces contradictions, and produces a top bet plus a backup plan. The Decider names both; without an explicit backup, invalidation of the top bet sends the team back to ambiguous debate.

Family contract: [`docs/reference/skill-families/foundation-sprint-skills-contract.md`](../../docs/reference/skill-families/foundation-sprint-skills-contract.md). This skill is a member of `foundation-sprint-skills`.

When to Use

• Day 2 afternoon of a Foundation Sprint.
• Approach Options is signed; the team has 3-7 candidate approaches advancing.
• The team has at least 1 team-specific custom lens prepared (per ratified spec decision; classic lenses alone are insufficient).

When NOT to Use

• Approach Options is unresolved or under-numbered (fewer than 3). Force a third option through the approach-options skill first.
• The team has pre-committed to a top bet. Magic Lenses is a sense-making exercise; if the decision is already made, the time is better spent on Founding Hypothesis.
• The team is exhausted and cannot evaluate clearly. Postpone to Day 2 morning of a follow-up sprint rather than rush.

What This Skill Produces

A single bundled artifact with six sections:

1. **Classic lens charts**: customer, pragmatic, growth, money lenses each as a 2x2 plot or qualitative position of every approach. 2. **Custom lens charts**: at least 1 team-specific lens (defensibility, mission fit, founder excitement, learning rate, etc.). 3. **Pattern review**: consistent winners across lenses, contradictions, biggest trade-off the team is making. 4. **Top bet**: the Decider's chosen approach with rationale. 5. **Backup plan**: the runner-up approach the team falls back to if the top bet invalidates. 6. **Decision rationale**: one paragraph explaining why the top bet over the backup.

See `references/TEMPLATE.md` for the canonical structure and `references/EXAMPLE.md` for the Brainshelf example.

The Five Canonical Lenses

| Lens | What it asks | Why it matters | |---|---|---| | Customer | Which approach do target customers immediately understand and want? | If customers don't get it, nothing else matters | | Pragmatic | Which approach can the team ship at quality in [build window]? | Beautiful approaches the team can't ship are not real options | | Growth | Which approach gives the team a story strong enough to acquire users without paid channels? | Friction at the door tells you about word-of-mouth potential | | Money | Which approach has the cleanest path to a paying customer? | Strategic clarity must include the revenue path | | Custom (1+ required) | Team-specific lens that captures what would otherwise be missed | Each team has a unique constraint or opportunity worth a dedicated view |

Custom lens examples: defensibility against a specific competitor, founder excitement, mission fit, learning rate, regulatory risk, partner alignment, hiring leverage.

Sequence (105 minutes)

Step 1: Frame the lenses (5 min)

Facilitator restates the 4 classic lenses and confirms the 1 or more custom lenses the team prepared. If no custom lens is prepared, this skill prompts the team to generate one before proceeding (per ratified spec decision).

Step 2: Score each approach per lens (40-60 min)

For each lens, plot each approach on a 2x2 of (high/low value on that lens) by (high/low feasibility for that lens). Use dot positions rather than numeric scores; arbitrary precision (3.7 vs 3.8) is a smell that the team has confused sense-making with math.

The team discusses each lens briefly before plotting. Decider does not vote in this step; the Decider supervotes at the end.

Step 3: Pattern review (15-25 min)

After all lenses are plotted, the team identifies:

• **Consistent winners**: approaches that score in the top half of 3 or more lenses.
• **Consistent losers**: approaches that score in the bottom half of 3 or more lenses. These drop out.
• **Contradictions**: approaches that win one lens hard but lose another. These surface the trade-offs the Decider must make.
• **Biggest trade-off**: name it explicitly. "Boring-and-shippable vs risky-and-distinctive." "Mass-market vs niche-defensible." Naming the trade-off prevents the Decider from picking by vibes.

Step 4: Decider supervote on top bet (10-15 min)

The Decider names the top bet. The chosen approach should be:

• A consistent winner OR a contradictory approach the Decider explicitly chooses to take the bet on.
• Defensible in language ("we are betting [trade-off] because [reason]").
• Aligned with the Mini Manifesto from Day 1.

Step 5: Decider names backup plan (5-10 min)

The Decider names the backup. The backup is NOT a