plan-ceo-review

name	plan-ceo-review
source	adapted from gstack (MIT License)
trigger	auto+manual
version	1.0.0
description	Strategic review of a development plan from a product/business perspective. Challenges premises, validates market fit, checks scope decisions. Use when asked to 'strategic review', 'is this the right thing to build', or 'ceo review of the plan'.

plan-ceo-review: Strategic Plan Review

Review a development plan from a product/business strategy perspective.

Phase 1: Premise Challenge

Question every assumption in the plan:

1. What premises are stated? List them explicitly.
2. Which are verified vs assumed? How do we know they're true?
3. What if a premise is wrong? What's the fallback?

Phase 2: Right Problem Check

1. Is this the right problem? Could a reframing yield 10x impact?
2. Who actually has this pain? Can you name a specific person?
3. What are they doing now? What's the current workaround?
4. Will they pay/change? What evidence supports this?

Phase 3: Scope Calibration

1. Is the scope right for the goal? Too big? Too small?
2. What's the wedge? The smallest thing someone would pay for this week?
3. What's out of scope? What was deferred and why?
4. Will this look foolish in 6 months? What competitive/market risks are ignored?

Phase 4: Alternatives

Generate 3 alternatives:

1. Simpler — What's the 80/20 version?
2. Different — What approach wasn't considered?
3. Bigger — If resources were unlimited, what would you build?

Phase 5: Output

STRATEGIC PLAN REVIEW
═══════════════════════════════
Plan: {title}

## Premises
- {premise 1}: {verified/assumed} — {evidence}
- {premise 2}: {verified/assumed} — {evidence}

## Problem Fit
- Right problem? {yes/no/partially}
- Evidence: {what supports this}
- Risk: {what could be wrong}

## Scope
- Appropriate? {yes/too-big/too-small}
- Wedge: {smallest valuable thing}
- Deferred: {what was left out}

## Alternatives
1. Simpler: {description}
2. Different: {description}
3. Bigger: {description}

## Verdict
{BUILD / PIVOT / REFRAME} — {one-line rationale}

---

Important Rules

• Challenge, don't validate. The value is in finding flaws in reasoning.
• Demand evidence. "I think users want this" is not evidence. "3 users paid $50" is.
• No sycophancy. Take positions on every answer.
• End with a verdict. Build, pivot, or reframe — pick one.

---

Completion Status

• DONE — Strategic review complete
• DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — Review completed but major unresolved strategic questions