Evaluate Opportunity

Evaluate Opportunity

Score a product/startup opportunity from a solo-founder / indie-builder perspective, then generate and rank concrete strategies for pursuing it. Output is a scored summary + ranked strategy options + a recommended path.

The lens: not chasing $B markets. Optimizing for "buildable by one person, makes real money, defensible enough that I'm not crushed in month 6."

Before Starting — Self-Hydration

1. Identify whether this is for an existing product or a new exploration (read host repo's CLAUDE.md; ask if ambiguous).
2. Read:
   • data/tasks/active.md — grep for opportunity-tagged items in Now/Next/Later (current bets on the table).
   • data/decisions/index.md — filter rows where Type is Scope, Positioning, Kill/Park, or Pricing (last 180 days). Open the most relevant decision files.
   • data/knowledge/market-landscape/*.md — read the most recent ## Scan — YYYY-MM-DD section for the relevant market.
   • Grep data/signals/active.md for entries from the last 60 days matching the opportunity area.
3. Briefly summarize what's already in the portfolio before scoring the new opportunity.

If data/decisions/ is empty AND data/knowledge/market-landscape/ is empty, warn the user — scoring without any prior context is guesswork. Suggest running /market-scan first, or proceed with assumptions flagged explicitly.

Scoring Framework

Score each dimension 1–5 using the anchors below. A score must cite specific evidence (signal anchor, knowledge file, public data, or stated assumption). Unsupported scores default to the lower anchor.

1. Market (indie-scaled)

Sized for what one person can realistically capture, not TAM theatre.

Score	Anchor
1	Hobby market. Hard to imagine >$2K MRR ceiling. Audience tiny, broke, or both.
2	Niche but thin. Plausible $2–5K MRR. Buyers exist but are hard to reach or won't pay much.
3	Lifestyle-business range. $5–20K MRR plausible in 12 months. Reachable audience, willing to pay, clear pain.
4	Durable indie business. $20–50K MRR plausible in 12 months. Growing demand, clear willingness to pay, multiple buyer segments.
5	Indie cash machine. $50K+ MRR plausible in 12 months OR 1K+ paying users reachable. Tailwind (new platform, regulation, behavior shift) actively pulling demand in.

2. Competition

Even as a solo, you need to know the shape of the field.

Score	Anchor
1	Saturated. Multiple well-funded incumbents + dozens of indie clones. No defensible wedge. Race to the bottom on price.
2	Crowded. Several established players. Differentiation possible but easy to copy (UX, price, one feature).
3	Active but with whitespace. 2–4 serious players, clear underserved segment / workflow / price tier. A solo can carve a niche.
4	Sparse or fragmented. Incumbents are slow, generic, or structurally can't serve this niche. Solo-defensible wedge (taste, speed, community, distribution).
5	Empty or asleep. No direct competition, OR incumbents actively ignore this segment. Wedge compounds (audience, content, data, integration depth).

3. Founder Fit

Score	Anchor
1	No domain knowledge, no access to customers, no obvious path in.
2	Adjacent experience. Need 3+ months to build competence. Cold outreach to reach first users.
3	Some domain familiarity. Direct access to 5–10 prospective users via network. Sustained interest plausible.
4	Deep domain experience OR warm access to 25+ prospective users. Strong conviction.
5	Uniquely positioned — lived experience, insider network, or rare expertise. Direct access to 50+ ideal users. Couldn't-stop-if-I-tried conviction.

4. Feasibility

Score	Anchor
1	Requires capability you don't have (regulated, hardware, specialized ML, large team). MVP > 6 months.
2	Technically possible but stretches stack. MVP 2–6 months. Unknown cost tail.
3	Buildable with current stack. MVP 4–8 weeks. Cost-per-user bounded.
4	Buildable with current stack. MVP 1–2 weeks. Cost model understood within 2x.
5	Prototype in days. Cost-per-user known. You've built something like this before.

Strategy Generation

After scoring, generate 2–3 distinct strategies for actually pursuing this opportunity. Strategies are concrete go-to-market + product shapes, not generic advice.

Each strategy must specify:

• Shape — what you build + how you charge (e.g. "open-source CLI + paid cloud", "$29/mo SaaS sold via cold outreach", "free tool + paid templates marketplace", "one-time purchase desktop app", "consulting → productize").
• Wedge — the specific reason this beats incumbents for a specific buyer.
• First 100 users — concrete acquisition channel (community, SEO, cold outreach, content, partner, marketplace).

Score each strategy on:

Field	Notes
Likelihood (1–5)	Honest probability this actually reaches $5K MRR in 12 months given the dimension scores above.
Time to first $1	Weeks. Be specific.
Why it could fail	One sentence — the most likely failure mode (not a list).
What would unlock 5★	One concrete change (a partnership, a piece of evidence, a skill) that would push likelihood up.

Strategies should be genuinely different — varying the buyer, the channel, the price model, or the build shape. Two flavors of "B2B SaaS with cold outreach" is one strategy, not two.

Output

# Opportunity Evaluation — {opportunity name} — {date}

## Summary
{2–3 sentences: what the opportunity is and why it's worth a look now.}

## Scores

| Dimension | Score | Reasoning (with evidence) |
|---|---|---|
| Market (indie-scaled) | {1–5} | {anchor-backed reasoning + citation} |
| Competition | {1–5} | {...} |
| Founder Fit | {1–5} | {...} |
| Feasibility | {1–5} | {...} |
| **Total** | **{sum}/20** | |

## Strategies

### Strategy A — {short name}
- **Shape:** {build + pricing}
- **Wedge:** {specific reason this wins for a specific buyer}
- **First 100 users:** {concrete channel}
- **Likelihood:** {1–5}
- **Time to first $1:** {weeks}
- **Why it could fail:** {one sentence}
- **What would unlock 5★:** {one concrete change}

### Strategy B — {short name}
{same fields}

### Strategy C — {short name, optional}
{same fields}

## Recommendation
**{Pursue Strategy X / Pursue narrow / Park / Kill}**

- **Pursue** — best strategy ≥ 4 likelihood, dimension total ≥ 14, no dimension < 3. Ship the first validation step this week.
- **Pursue narrow** — best strategy = 3 likelihood, dimension total ≥ 12. Worth a time-boxed test (2–4 weeks) before committing.
- **Park** — no strategy ≥ 3 likelihood, OR one dimension = 1. Note the trigger that would change the call.
- **Kill** — no strategy ≥ 3 AND dimension total < 10. Don't pursue.

{One sentence on why this strategy beats the others.}

## Next Steps
1. {Concrete validation step for the recommended strategy this week.}
2. {...}
3. {...}

## Suggested Follow-ups
- Add a task to `data/tasks/active.md` for the first validation step with `priority:now`.
- Log a Decision via `/log-decision` (Type: Kill/Park/Scope/Positioning) if this supersedes an active bet.

Worked Example

Opportunity: AI-powered weekly review tool for solo PMs.

Dimension	Score	Reasoning
Market (indie-scaled)	3	Solo PM / indie maker audience ~200K worldwide (Indie Hackers 2025). $5–20K MRR plausible at $20/mo with 250–1000 paying users. Pain real but not bleeding — willingness-to-pay unproven.
Competition	3	Linear, Notion AI, Height cover adjacent ground but none focus on portfolio-level rollup for multi-product solos. Whitespace exists; not empty.
Founder Fit	5	Built PM OS plugin. 10+ yrs PM experience. Direct access to 50+ solo-PM peers via founder network.
Feasibility	5	Skill framework + Notion integration already running. MVP = 1 week.
Total	16/20

Strategy A — Hosted /weekly-review SaaS

• Shape: $19/mo hosted version of the existing /weekly-review skill. Login + Notion OAuth. Weekly digest emailed.
• Wedge: Only tool that rolls up multiple products for one PM. Linear/Notion are single-workspace.
• First 100 users: Indie Hackers + r/ProductManagement posts; founder network DM (50 warm).
• Likelihood: 4
• Time to first $1: 3 weeks (1 wk MVP, 2 wks waitlist → launch).
• Why it could fail: Solo PMs already cobble this together in Notion and won't pay $19/mo for the polish.
• What would unlock 5★: 10 of the 50 warm contacts pre-pay before MVP ships.

Strategy B — Free OSS plugin + paid team tier

• Shape: PM OS plugin stays free + open. Paid tier ($49/mo) for shared team digests, multi-user Notion sync.
• Wedge: Distribution via the OSS plugin you already ship. Upgrade path is automatic for power users.
• First 100 users: Existing plugin users — convert 5–10% to paid.
• Likelihood: 3
• Time to first $1: 6 weeks (need real install base first).
• Why it could fail: Plugin install base is too small to convert meaningfully; team buyers need different positioning entirely.
• What would unlock 5★: Plugin hits 500+ active installs first.

Strategy C — Productized weekly review service

• Shape: $200/mo done-for-you weekly review for solo founders. You + the skill do the work; deliver async.
• Wedge: Buyers who want the outcome (clarity), not another tool to maintain.
• First 100 users: Cold outreach to indie founders w/ 2+ products on Twitter/X.
• Likelihood: 2
• Time to first $1: 2 weeks.
• Why it could fail: Doesn't scale solo past ~15 clients; high-touch capacity ceiling kills it before it compounds.
• What would unlock 5★: Productize delivery to <30 min/client/week.

Recommendation

Pursue Strategy A.

Highest likelihood, fastest revenue, leverages founder fit and warm network. Strategy B is the right follow-on once A proves WTP; Strategy C trades long-term ceiling for short-term cash and isn't worth it given A's 3-week timeline.

Next Steps

1. DM 10 of the 50 warm contacts this week — frame: "would you pre-pay $19/mo for hosted weekly review of all your products?"
2. If ≥3 yes → ship the 1-week MVP.
3. If <3 yes → revisit. The pain isn't sharp enough at this price.

Follow-ups

Contextual to the recommendation:

• Pursue → suggest /design-experiment to frame the first validation test for the chosen strategy.
• Pursue narrow + low Feasibility → suggest consulting the systems-architect agent on the tech cost ceiling.
• Park → /log-decision with Type: Park, noting the trigger to revisit.
• Kill → /log-decision with Type: Kill, linking the evaluation as context.
• Any verdict: add the chosen strategy (or the "revisit" trigger) as a task in data/tasks/active.md.