pricing-audit

name	pricing-audit
description	30-point audit of a B2B pricing program across four dimensions — diagnostic data (8 points), reference frames + copy (8 points), tier architecture (8 points), and operating practice (6 points). Produces a 0-100 score, the top 3 levers, and a 90-day remediation order. Loaded by the main pricing skill when the operator asks to audit or grade their pricing. Based on the JMC 30-Point Pricing Audit framework.
user-invocable	false
allowed-tools	["Read","Write","Grep"]

Pricing Audit — sub-skill

The deeper audit. Where pricing-diagnostic runs 3 surfaces fast, pricing-audit runs 30 checks across 4 dimensions and produces a prioritized 90-day remediation plan.

Activation

The main pricing skill routes here when the operator says:

• "Audit my pricing program"
• "Grade my pricing 0-100"
• "What's my biggest pricing lever?"
• "Full pricing review"
• "What would Hermann Simon say about my pricing?"

The 30 checks

Dimension 1 — Diagnostic Data (8 checks)

#	Check	Pass criteria
1	WTP discovery recency	Structured WTP method within last 18 months per PSP
2	WTP method rigor	At least Van Westendorp (n≥20) or Gabor-Granger (n≥30)
3	PSP segmentation	Distinct WTP distribution per PSP, not single-curve
4	Close-rate by tier	Close-rate tracked per tier per PSP per quarter
5	Discount-rate by PSP	Mean + max discount tracked by PSP, monthly
6	Walk-away tracking	Lost-to-price reasons captured in CRM, weekly
7	Competitor price tracking	Monthly snapshot of 3-5 direct competitors
8	Pocket-price calculation	Pocket-price waterfall built + updated quarterly

Dimension 2 — Reference Frames + Copy (8 checks)

#	Check	Pass criteria
9	Reference frame named	Pricing page anchors on inertia, opportunity cost, or replacement cost (NOT competitor)
10	Inertia value quantified	Specific number on the page (e.g., "you're solving this today with $X/yr of internal time")
11	Outcome guarantee present	Outcome-tied guarantee with bounded liability + qualification gates
12	Loss-aversion copy	De-risking language above the gain-of-switching language
13	No banned anchors	No cost-plus reasoning, no "we're cheaper than X"
14	One specific outcome per tier	Each tier has 1-2 outcomes the buyer can self-rate against
15	Tested copy	Pricing copy has been tested in the last 12 months (A/B or qualitative)
16	Stakeholder-aware copy	Copy speaks to both the user (technical buyer) and the budget holder

Dimension 3 — Tier Architecture (8 checks)

#	Check	Pass criteria
17	Three tiers, no more	Three tiers visible on page (Enterprise gate above ~$30K ACV OK)
18	Decoy designed correctly	Bottom tier is asymmetrically dominated (same metric, strictly less)
19	Anchor tier exists	Top tier sets the reference frame; ≥3x the target tier price
20	Value metric is consistent	Same value metric across all tiers (per-seat or per-call, not mixed)
21	Feature differentiation is clean	Buyer can grok the differences in <30 seconds (test this on a fresh viewer)
22	Tier landing distribution healthy	~5-10% decoy / 70-80% target / 10-25% anchor (per last 90 days)
23	No "Contact Us" below $30K ACV	Numbers visible for everything under mid-market threshold
24	Annual vs monthly delta is meaningful	Annual prepay = ≥25% discount tied to commercial value, OR removed

Dimension 4 — Operating Practice (6 checks)

#	Check	Pass criteria
25	Discount policy documented	Tiered approval thresholds (e.g., 0-10% rep, 10-20% manager, 20%+ VP)
26	Pocket-price waterfall reviewed	Pocket-price waterfall updated + reviewed quarterly
27	Renewal price increase cadence	Documented annual cadence + 90-day-prior renewal notice
28	Expansion playbook	Documented expansion-pricing triggers + motion
29	Quarterly pricing review	Calendar-blocked review with product + sales + finance reps
30	Failed-test registry	Documented log of pricing tests run + outcomes (especially the failures)

Workflow

1. Load inputs

From brand-config.json:

• pricing.* section (all subfields)
• customer.psps[]

From the operator's pricing page URL (if provided):

• Use WebFetch to grab the live page
• Parse tier structure, copy, value metric

2. Run each of 30 checks

For each check, output one of:

• ✅ PASS
• ⚠️ PARTIAL (with what's missing)
• ❌ FAIL (with the specific gap)
• 🔘 NOT APPLICABLE (with the reason)

3. Calculate score

Score per dimension:

• Dim 1: PASS count × 12.5 (max 100)
• Dim 2: PASS count × 12.5 (max 100)
• Dim 3: PASS count × 12.5 (max 100)
• Dim 4: PASS count × 16.7 (max 100)

Overall = weighted mean: Dim 1 × 0.25 + Dim 2 × 0.25 + Dim 3 × 0.25 + Dim 4 × 0.25.

4. Identify the top 3 levers

Rank failed/partial checks by:

1. Magnitude — what's the expected revenue/margin impact?
2. Reversibility — how easy to undo if it doesn't work?
3. Diagnostic depth — do we know enough to act, or do we need more data first?

Top 3 = highest magnitude × reversibility × diagnostic-depth.

5. 90-day remediation order

For each of the top 3 levers, output:

Lever 1: {description}
  Why: {magnitude + impact framing}
  Action: {specific sub-skill route — e.g., "Run pricing-pocket-waterfall"}
  Owner: {who}
  Timeline: {week 1-3 / week 4-6 / week 7-12}
  Success metric: {how we'll know it worked}

6. Output format

Pricing Audit — {company}
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

OVERALL: {score}/100

Dimension 1 — Diagnostic Data: {score}/100
  ✅ {n} pass / ⚠️ {n} partial / ❌ {n} fail
Dimension 2 — Reference Frames + Copy: {score}/100
  ✅ {n} pass / ⚠️ {n} partial / ❌ {n} fail
Dimension 3 — Tier Architecture: {score}/100
  ✅ {n} pass / ⚠️ {n} partial / ❌ {n} fail
Dimension 4 — Operating Practice: {score}/100
  ✅ {n} pass / ⚠️ {n} partial / ❌ {n} fail

─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
TOP 3 LEVERS (90-day remediation):

1. {lever 1}
2. {lever 2}
3. {lever 3}

DETAILED CHECK RESULTS:
[full 30-row table]

Self-check

• All 30 checks evaluated with rationale (not just scores)
• Score per dimension + overall calculated
• Top 3 levers identified with magnitude + reversibility + diagnostic-depth reasoning
• 90-day order respects sequencing (e.g., WTP discovery before tier rebuild)
• No fabrication — uncertain checks flagged, not guessed

References

• ../../pricing/references/pricing-framework.md — framework underlying each check
• ../pricing-diagnostic/SKILL.md — the lighter 3-surface diagnostic
• ../pricing-tribunal/SKILL.md — for material decisions surfaced by the audit