ReadySetLaunch (readysetlaunch.ai) platform help — an AI startup-idea validator built to interrogate, not flatter. Its Launch Control walks founders through 13 questions across 7 pillars (problem, customer, demand, differentiation, execution, distribution, monetisation), surfacing the gaps in weak answers instead of handing out an inflated score, grounded in a database of failed, unicorn, and acquired startups. Deliberately slow (30–45 min/idea), anti-gaslighting, credit-based, no subscription. Use when running an idea through ReadySetLaunch / Launch Control, interpreting its pillar-level gaps and launch-readiness report, comparing its interrogation model against score-in-seconds validators like IdeaProof or Validator AI, deciding whether credit packs are worth it, or asking whether it has an API to export reports. UI-only, no public API. Do NOT use for the validate-before-building method or comparing validators (use /sales-idea-validation), or building the smoke-test landing page (use /sales-funnel).
Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.
Quelldateien prüfen
Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Ein direkter Befehl überspringt den Prüf-Prompt. Prüfen Sie die Quelle, bevor Sie ihn ausführen.
ReadySetLaunch (readysetlaunch.ai) platform help — an AI startup-idea validator built to interrogate, not flatter. Its Launch Control walks founders through 13 questions across 7 pillars (problem, customer, demand, differentiation, execution, distribution, monetisation), surfacing the gaps in weak answers instead of handing out an inflated score, grounded in a database of failed, unicorn, and acquired startups. Deliberately slow (30–45 min/idea), anti-gaslighting, credit-based, no subscription. Use when running an idea through ReadySetLaunch / Launch Control, interpreting its pillar-level gaps and launch-readiness report, comparing its interrogation model against score-in-seconds validators like IdeaProof or Validator AI, deciding whether credit packs are worth it, or asking whether it has an API to export reports. UI-only, no public API. Do NOT use for the validate-before-building method or comparing validators (use /sales-idea-validation), or building the smoke-test landing page (use /sales-funnel).
argument-hint
[describe what you need help with in ReadySetLaunch]
license
MIT
version
1.0.0
tags
["sales","validation","pre-launch","platform"]
ReadySetLaunch Platform Help
ReadySetLaunch (readysetlaunch.ai) is an AI startup-idea validator built to interrogate, not flatter.
Its core product, Launch Control, walks a founder through 13 structured questions across 7 pillars
(problem clarity, target customer, demand signal strength, differentiation, execution feasibility,
distribution readiness, monetisation viability). Each question breaks into plain-English sub-prompts that
show what a good answer looks like; on weak answers it surfaces the specific gap and coaches you to
close it — rather than emitting a single feel-good score. Every signal is graded against a database of
real startup outcomes (failed, successful, unicorn, acquired). It's deliberately slow (~30–45 min
per idea — "30 minutes on purpose"), explicitly anti-gaslighting (no engineered encouragement, no
hallucinated confidence), and credit-based with no subscription. It is a UI tool — no documented
public API. It also publishes competitor review pages (/compare/{tool}/review/) and a startup
case database (/cases/).
Step 1 — Gather context
If references/learnings.md exists, read it first for accumulated platform knowledge.
Ask only what you can't infer:
What do you want from ReadySetLaunch?
A) Run an idea through Launch Control and interpret the pillar-level gaps / launch-readiness report
B) Understand the 7-pillar / 13-question method and how the "surface the gap" scoring works
C) Understand the credits system — free credits, packs, no subscription — and whether it's worth it
D) Export or automate the report (API / integration reality)
What's the real question — "is this idea worth building?" or "how do I use this tool?" If it's the
go/no-go decision itself, that's /sales-idea-validation (a validator's output is a gut check, not
demand) — route in Step 2.
Skip-ahead: if the user wants the validate-before-building method or to compare validators across the
market, that's a /sales-idea-validation question — route immediately.
Step 2 — Route or answer directly
If the user's question is about…
Route to
The validate-before-building method, or the go/no-go decision itself
/sales-idea-validation {question}
A full cross-market comparison of validators (ranking IdeaProof, Validator AI, WorthBuild, DimeADozen… to pick one) — but answer a quick ReadySetLaunch-vs-X how-they-differ inline first (Step 4)
/sales-idea-validation {question}
Building the smoke-test / fake-door landing page to test real demand
/sales-funnel {question}
Growing a pre-launch waitlist / capturing real demand
/sales-audience-growth {question}
When routing, give the exact command: "This is a {domain} question — run: /sales-idea-validation {original question}"
Otherwise, answer ReadySetLaunch-specific questions using Step 3.
Step 3 — ReadySetLaunch platform reference
Read references/platform-guide.md for the full reference — the 7 pillars and 13-question structure,
how the gap-surfacing scoring differs from a single score, the failure/exit case database it grades
against, the credit-and-packs pricing (no subscription), the review/case content it publishes, and the
no-public-API automation reality.
Answer using only the relevant section — don't dump the full reference.
Step 4 — Actionable guidance
Frame it as the anti-inflation validator — the value is the gaps, not a score. Unlike
score-in-seconds tools (IdeaProof, Validator AI) that hand out a high number (medians run ~78/100),
Launch Control is built to surface where your answers are weak across the 7 pillars. Tell the user
the useful output is the specific gaps and the pillar-level signal, not a pass/fail — its whole
pitch is "no AI gaslighting," so read it for what it flags, not for reassurance.
When asked how it compares to a fast-score validator, give the model-level contrast inline first, then offer the cross-market route. If the user asks ReadySetLaunch vs IdeaProof / Validator AI (or "is it worth it over X"), answer the how-they-differ directly: ReadySetLaunch interrogates across 7 pillars over ~30–45 min and surfaces gaps, whereas a fast-score tool like IdeaProof produces a score in seconds and bundles a broader pre-launch toolkit (plan/brand/logo/deck/ads). Tell the user to pick by rigor-vs-speed, not by free-credit count — then offer /sales-idea-validation for a full validator-market comparison. Don't just route the question away.
It's still an AI opinion — the go/no-go is a real demand test. Even a rigorous, database-grounded
interrogation is a structured gut check, not proof of demand. A "strong signal" across pillars does
not mean strangers will pay. Tell the user to take the pillar gaps as a sharpening tool and put the
actual go/no-go on a smoke test or pre-sale — route the decision to /sales-idea-validation and the
build to /sales-funnel.
Set expectations on the time cost — that's the point. It deliberately takes ~30–45 minutes per
idea and makes you write real answers; it's not a 120-second score. If the user wants a fast
throwaway number, this is the wrong tool; if they want to be forced to think, it's the right one.
Present pricing as best-effort and credit-based with no subscription. Best-effort: 3 free credits
(no card), then one-time packs (from ~£14.99), and credits never expire — there is no
monthly plan. Prices move and packs/credit counts aren't fully published, so tell the user to
confirm current packs and per-idea credit cost at readysetlaunch.ai/pricing rather than treating
these figures as fixed. Model cost as "how many ideas will I run," not a recurring fee.
There's no public API — don't plan an integration around it. If asked to export or automate, say
plainly there's no documented public API, no webhooks, no Zapier/Make — it's a UI tool. The
workable fallbacks: copy/save the launch-readiness report manually from the app, and if they need
validation scripted, use a tool built for programmatic use. The thing actually worth automating is the
real signal (landing-page conversions), not the report — route that to /sales-funnel.
Distinguish the product from its review/case content. ReadySetLaunch also publishes competitor
reviews (/compare/…) and a startup case database (/cases/). If the user is reading one of those
pages, note it's the vendor's own comparison content (it positions Launch Control favourably) — useful
context, not a neutral benchmark.
If you discover a gotcha or tip not in references/learnings.md, append it there with today's date.
Gotchas
Best-effort from research (2026-07) — ReadySetLaunch's pillars, credit packs, and pricing move; verify at readysetlaunch.ai.
It surfaces gaps, it doesn't validate. By design there's no single confidence score to celebrate —
the output is where your thinking is weak across the 7 pillars. A "strong signal" is still an AI
judgement, not demand; follow it with a real-behavior test.
It's slow on purpose (~30–45 min/idea). This is a feature, not a bug — if a user expects a
120-second score they'll bounce. Set the expectation up front.
Credit-based, no subscription. You buy one-time packs (best-effort from ~£14.99); credits never
expire and there's no monthly plan. Model cost as ideas-run, not a recurring fee. Confirm packs at
readysetlaunch.ai/pricing — exact credit-per-idea counts aren't fully published.
No documented public API, no webhooks, no Zapier/Make. It's a web tool — you can't script or export
it programmatically; copy/save outputs manually.
/compare/ and /cases/ pages are the vendor's own content. The competitor reviews and case
database live on ReadySetLaunch's site and position Launch Control favourably — treat as vendor
comparison, not a neutral source.
Grounding data is a curated database, not live scraping. Signals are graded against a knowledge base
of past startup outcomes — strong for pattern-matching to known failures/exits, but it's not real-time
market demand.
Related skills
/sales-idea-validation — The tool-agnostic validate-before-building method + the full validator landscape (use this to actually decide build-or-not; a validator's output is a gut check, not demand)
/sales-ideaproof — IdeaProof platform help (the score-in-120s + pre-launch-suite contrast to ReadySetLaunch's interrogation model)
/sales-validator-ai — Validator AI platform help (a free score-and-report validator — the fast-score sibling)
/sales-funnel — Build the smoke-test / fake-door landing page the real demand test runs on
/sales-audience-growth — Grow a pre-launch waitlist and capture real demand
/sales-do — Not sure which skill to use? The router matches any sales objective to the right skill. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-do -a claude-code
Examples
Example 1: "ReadySetLaunch flagged gaps in my demand and distribution pillars — is my idea dead?"
User says: "Launch Control said my demand-signal and distribution answers were weak. Should I drop the idea?"
Skill does: Explains the flagged gaps are the point — the tool surfaces where the thinking is thin
(here: no evidence anyone wants it, no plan to reach them), not a verdict. Tells the user to treat the two
weak pillars as a to-do list (go get demand evidence, name a distribution channel) and to settle the
actual go/no-go with a real test — a smoke-test landing page or pre-sale — via /sales-idea-validation,
not by re-running the questionnaire until the gaps disappear.
Result: The founder uses the gaps to sharpen the plan and gets a real go/no-go from stranger behavior.
Example 2: How do the credits work, and is it worth it vs IdeaProof? (pricing / comparison)
User says: "ReadySetLaunch gives 3 free credits with no subscription. How does that compare to IdeaProof's credits, and which should I use?"
Skill does: Lays out ReadySetLaunch as credit-based with no subscription (best-effort: 3 free
credits no card, one-time packs from ~£14.99, credits never expire) and contrasts the model, not just
price — ReadySetLaunch interrogates across 7 pillars in ~30–45 min and surfaces gaps, whereas IdeaProof
scores in ~120s and bundles brand/logo/deck assets. Recommends ReadySetLaunch when the goal is to pressure-
test thinking and IdeaProof when the goal is fast breadth, and tells the user to confirm current packs at
readysetlaunch.ai/pricing.
Result: The user picks by what they actually need (rigor vs speed/assets), not by the free-credit count.
Example 3: Can I export or automate ReadySetLaunch reports? (developer/automation)
User says: "I want to run 20 ideas through ReadySetLaunch and pull the launch-readiness reports into a spreadsheet via API."
Skill does: States plainly there's no documented public API, no webhooks, no Zapier/Make — it's a
UI tool, so there's no supported way to batch or export programmatically. Suggests copying/saving each
report manually, or using a tool built for programmatic validation if scripting is essential, and notes the
thing worth automating is a real demand signal (landing-page conversions), not a generated report —
pointing to /sales-idea-validation and /sales-funnel.
Result: The user avoids building on a non-existent API and picks a workable path.
Troubleshooting
"It didn't give me a score — just a list of gaps"
Symptom: The user expected a single viability number and got pillar-level gap feedback instead.
Cause: By design, Launch Control surfaces gaps rather than emitting a feel-good score — that's the
anti-gaslighting positioning.
Solution: Read the gaps as the deliverable. Close the weak pillars one at a time, then take the go/no-go
to a real demand test (smoke test / pre-sale) via /sales-idea-validation — don't re-answer until the
gaps vanish, which just games the tool.
"This took 40 minutes — I wanted a quick check"
Symptom: The process felt slow compared to a 120-second validator.
Cause: ReadySetLaunch is deliberately slow (~30–45 min/idea) — the friction is the feature.
Solution: If the user wants a fast throwaway number, a score-in-seconds tool (IdeaProof, Validator AI)
fits better — route via /sales-idea-validation. If they want to be forced to think through the 7 pillars,
ReadySetLaunch is the right tool; budget the time.
"I want an API / to export the report automatically"
Symptom: Wants to script ReadySetLaunch or pull reports into another system.
Cause: ReadySetLaunch has no documented public API, webhooks, or iPaaS connectors — it's a web tool.
Solution: Copy/save the launch-readiness report manually, or use a tool intended for programmatic use;
automate a real demand signal (landing-page analytics) instead. See /sales-idea-validation.