// Structured post-conversation extraction for founders. Invoke when the user says "debrief", "conversation extraction", "what resonated", "meeting notes", "post-meeting review", or describes a conversation they just had with an investor, customer, partner, or advisor and wants to capture what they learned.
| name | founder-debrief |
| description | Structured post-conversation extraction for founders. Invoke when the user says "debrief", "conversation extraction", "what resonated", "meeting notes", "post-meeting review", or describes a conversation they just had with an investor, customer, partner, or advisor and wants to capture what they learned. |
| metadata | {"version":"1.0.0","author":"Assaf Kipnis","tags":["founder","debrief","conversation","extraction","positioning","canonical"]} |
Extract structured insights from founder conversations (investor pitches, customer discovery, partner meetings, advisor calls) and route them to the right canonical files so nothing gets lost and positioning compounds over time.
Most founders leave conversations with scattered notes or nothing at all. This skill turns every conversation into a system update - capturing exact phrases that resonated, objections that need answers, and positioning drift before it becomes a problem.
canonical/talk-tracks.md, canonical/objections.md, or similar in the project directory.references/canonical-files.md for what each file does.)"For every conversation, extract these 8 sections. If a section has nothing, write "Nothing new" - never skip a section.
Capture the specific language, metaphors, or framings that made the other person lean in, nod, or say "that's interesting." Use their exact words when possible.
Route to: canonical/talk-tracks.md under the relevant persona tag
Format:
- "[exact phrase or framing]" - got [reaction] from [persona type]
Context: [what you were discussing when this landed]
Moments where they asked for clarification, looked lost, or you had to re-explain. These are positioning problems - if one person is confused, others will be too.
Route to: canonical/objections.md as clarity gaps
Format:
- Confusion: [what they didn't get]
Root cause: [why - was it jargon? wrong abstraction level? missing context?]
Better framing: [if you found one during the conversation]
Direct disagreements, skepticism, or "yeah, but..." moments. These become objections that need crisp answers.
Route to: canonical/objections.md under the relevant persona tag
Format:
- Objection: "[their words]"
Your response: [what you said]
Did it land? [yes/no/partially]
Better answer needed? [yes/no + notes]
Questions where you stumbled, deflected, or said "good question, let me think about that." These are gaps that need filling before the next similar conversation.
Route to: canonical/discovery.md as open questions
Format:
- Question: "[their question]"
Your response: [what you said, if anything]
Answer needed by: [next conversation type where this will come up]
Did they understand what you're building? Did they compare you to the wrong thing? Did they slot you into a category you don't belong in?
Route to: canonical/objections.md as misclassification risks, canonical/talk-tracks.md if you found a correction that worked
Format:
- They thought we were: [what they compared you to or categorized you as]
We're actually: [correct positioning]
Correction that worked: [if you found one]
Correction needed: [if you didn't]
Concrete next actions with owners and timelines. Not vague "let's stay in touch" - actual commitments.
Route to: Task system / CRM / my-project/relationships.md
Format:
- Action: [specific action]
Owner: [who]
Timeline: [when]
Trigger: [what needs to happen first, if anything]
If the conversation revealed that something in your current positioning needs updating - a number that's wrong, a claim that's overclaiming, a framing that doesn't work.
Route to: my-project/current-state.md, relevant canonical files
Format:
- Change: [what needs updating]
Reason: [what the conversation revealed]
Files affected: [which canonical files need updating]
Urgency: [before next pitch / this week / when convenient]
Moments where you needed data, a case study, a testimonial, or a reference and didn't have it. These compound - track them so you can fill them systematically.
Route to: canonical/discovery.md as proof gaps
Format:
- Proof needed: [what type of evidence]
Context: [when it came up and why it mattered]
Potential source: [where you might get this, if known]
| Insight Type | Primary Destination | Tag With |
|---|---|---|
| Resonant phrases | canonical/talk-tracks.md | Persona, date, context |
| Confusions | canonical/objections.md | Persona, root cause |
| Pushback/objections | canonical/objections.md | Persona, response quality |
| Unanswered questions | canonical/discovery.md | Urgency, next occurrence |
| Positioning drift | canonical/objections.md + talk-tracks.md | Misclassification type |
| Next steps | Task system / my-project/relationships.md | Owner, timeline |
| Positioning changes | my-project/current-state.md | Urgency, files affected |
| Proof gaps | canonical/discovery.md | Evidence type, source |
See references/routing-map.md for detailed examples of each routing path.
Before finalizing the debrief, verify:
If you're starting from scratch, see references/canonical-files.md for how to create the 6 core canonical files. The minimum viable setup is:
canonical/talk-tracks.md - Proven language organized by personacanonical/objections.md - Objections with answers, organized by personacanonical/discovery.md - Open questions and validated answersYou can add the other 3 (decisions.md, my-project/current-state.md, my-project/relationships.md) as your system matures.