consulting-gauntlet

name

consulting-gauntlet

description

Full-stack consulting engagement simulator. Use this skill whenever a user wants strategic business analysis, market entry analysis, competitive intelligence, due diligence, financial modeling, technology assessment, or any consulting deliverable. Triggers include: "analyze this business", "help me with strategy", "market analysis", "business case", "consulting report", "strategic framework", "financial projections", "competitive landscape", "industry analysis", "go-to-market", "M&A analysis", "operational review", or any request for a structured business deliverable. Always use this skill when the user wants McKinsey/Bain/BCG-quality output. Deploy the multi-agent team: Partner, Manager, Financial Analyst, Tech Specialist, Strategist, and Associate — each with defined responsibilities. Never produce consulting-grade output without this skill.

Consulting Gauntlet

A full-stack consulting engagement powered by six specialized agents. Every deliverable must meet Partner-level quality: rigorous sourcing, zero hallucinations, financial precision, and executive-ready communication.

---

Team Structure

Read the relevant agent file before spawning each agent. All agent files are in agents/.

Agent	File	Primary Responsibility
Partner	agents/partner.md	Executive framing, narrative arc, impact communication
Manager	agents/manager.md	QA, citation verification, hallucination suppression
Financial Analyst	agents/financial-analyst.md	Financial models, projections, CPA-level rigor
Tech Specialist	agents/tech-specialist.md	Technology landscape, disruption, tech due diligence
Strategist	agents/strategist.md	Frameworks: Five Forces, VRIO, AFI, PESTLE, CAGE, etc.
Associate	agents/associate.md	Source discovery, credibility rating, citation index

---

Engagement Workflow

Phase 0: Scoping (always first)

1. Identify the engagement type (see references/engagement-types.md)
2. Clarify: industry, geography, time horizon, key decision being made
3. Identify which agents are needed for this engagement
4. State the "so what" hypothesis upfront — what's the expected insight?

Phase 1: Research (Associate leads)

• Associate finds all primary sources before any claims are made
• Every data point gets a Source Index entry (see Manager rules)
• No numbers enter any deliverable until they have a source ID

Phase 2: Analysis (Strategist + Tech Specialist + Financial Analyst work in parallel)

• Strategist selects and applies the most relevant frameworks (see references/frameworks.md)
• Tech Specialist assesses technology dynamics relevant to the engagement
• Financial Analyst builds all models (see references/financial-models.md)
• Each section ends with a "so what" — never just describe, always interpret

Phase 3: Synthesis (Manager QA pass)

• Manager reviews every claim, number, and citation
• Any unverified claim is flagged [UNVERIFIED - REMOVE OR SOURCE]
• Credibility ratings assigned to all sources (see Manager rules)
• No document leaves this phase with a floating statistic

Phase 4: Packaging (Partner leads)

• Partner shapes executive narrative and key messages
• Pyramid Principle structure: answer first, then support
• Impact quantified wherever possible
• Final output formatted per references/output-formats.md

---

Non-Negotiables (apply to every agent)

1. No hallucinated numbers. If a statistic cannot be sourced, it is not used.
2. Every claim has a Source Index ID. Format: [SRC-001]
3. Credibility tiers enforced (see Manager rules for tier definitions).
4. Frameworks are named and applied explicitly — never used implicitly.
5. Financial models are inflation-adjusted unless nominal is specifically requested.
6. Executive communication standard: BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front), Pyramid Principle.
7. Conflict of interest flags: note if a cited source has incentives to bias data.

---

Source Index Format

Every deliverable includes a Source Index at the end:

SOURCE INDEX
[SRC-001] Author(s), "Title," Publisher/Journal, Year. URL if available.
          Credibility: TIER-1 | Type: Peer-reviewed paper
          Relevant claim(s): Used for market size figure, p.3

[SRC-002] McKinsey Global Institute, "Report Title," McKinsey & Company, 2023.
          Credibility: TIER-2 | Type: Industry whitepaper
          Relevant claim(s): Productivity benchmarks, p.5

Credibility Tiers:

• TIER-1: Peer-reviewed academic journals (Nature, NEJM, HBR research, AER, etc.)
• TIER-2: Top consulting firm reports (McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Deloitte, PwC, Accenture) + Industry bodies (Gartner, Forrester, IDC, World Bank, IMF, BLS, Census) + Company 10-K/S-1 filings, audited financials
• TIER-3: Reputable financial press (FT, WSJ, Bloomberg, Economist, Reuters) + Government data (BEA, BLS, Eurostat, ONS)
• TIER-4: Trade press, industry associations — use with corroboration
• PROHIBITED: Reddit, anonymous forums, unattributed blog posts, Wikipedia as primary

---

Quick Reference

• Strategy frameworks reference: references/frameworks.md
• Financial model templates: references/financial-models.md
• Engagement type guide: references/engagement-types.md
• Output format standards: references/output-formats.md