From rad-explain
This skill should be used when the user says "draft a pitch", "write a pitch for [project]", "one-pager", "executive summary", "investor pitch", "grant proposal", "pitch deck content", "partnership memo", "draft a funding pitch", "write a long-form pitch", or wants a longer-form pitch document (one-pager, executive summary, or deck-equivalent text) for a project. Different shape from `elevator-pitch` (which is the ~150-word compressed version). `draft-pitch` is for funding applications, grant proposals, partnership memos, and pitch-deck text. Output is grounded in repo source via check-grounding.py; no overpromising via check-overpromise.py.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/rad-explain:draft-pitch [--shape one-pager|exec-summary|deck-content] [--audience investor|grant|partner] [--output <path>] [--repo <path>][--shape one-pager|exec-summary|deck-content] [--audience investor|grant|partner] [--output <path>] [--repo <path>]This skill is limited to the following tools:
The summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
You are drafting a longer-form pitch document. Three shape options; choose based on the user's stated need:
You are drafting a longer-form pitch document. Three shape options; choose based on the user's stated need:
one-pager (~500-700 words) — single-page document for sharing with potential funders, partners, or stakeholdersexec-summary (~300-500 words) — denser front-matter for a longer proposal or memodeck-content (~600-1000 words, structured into slide-shaped sections) — text content for a pitch deck (slide titles + 2-4 bullet points per slide; user assembles the actual visual deck)All three are LONGER than elevator-pitch (~150 words) but SHORTER than a full proposal. They serve as the first-touch document a reviewer sees.
investor (default for one-pager / exec-summary)For a VC, angel, or accelerator evaluating commercial potential.
Required sections:
grantFor an academic, foundation, or government grant application.
Required sections (most grants want):
partnerFor a potential integration / co-marketing / strategic partnership.
Required sections:
When --shape deck-content, structure the output as slide-shaped sections.
Each "slide" is:
Standard deck shape (8-12 slides):
Skip slides without source backing; don't invent.
If --shape and --audience were both passed, proceed. Otherwise ask:
What shape?
1. One-pager (~500-700 words) — single-page share
2. Executive summary (~300-500 words) — proposal front-matter
3. Deck content (~600-1000 words) — pitch deck text
Who's it for?
1. Investor (VC / angel / accelerator)
2. Grant (academic / foundation / government)
3. Partner (integration / co-marketing / strategic)
Offer:
PITCH.md / EXEC-SUMMARY.md / DECK.md at repo rootdocs/pitch/<audience>-<shape>.md (in-repo persistence)In parallel:
README.mdpackage.json / pyproject.toml / similar manifestdocs/vision.md (if present) — primary source for problem/solution/audiencedocs/architecture.md (if present) — for solution shapedocs/roadmap.md (if present) — for stage and trajectorydocs/status.md (if present) — for current metricsdocs/decisions/*.md (if present) — for differentiation, why-this-choice contextgit log --oneline -20 — for stage signalBefore writing, surface to the user:
Source coverage for {shape} / {audience}:
✓ Have: {list of sources found}
✗ Missing: {list of sources not found, with what they would have provided}
Substantive gaps that would weaken this pitch:
{list — e.g., "no team section because no team info in repo", "no traction
metrics because no docs/status.md or analytics file", etc.}
How to proceed:
1. Draft what's possible from the available sources; flag gaps as TODO inline
2. Pause; you fill in the gaps first, then come back
3. Draft with placeholders; you fill in before sending
For each section:
python3 ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/check-grounding.py {output-path} --repo <repo-root> --json
python3 ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/check-overpromise.py {output-path} --json
For investor pitches especially: any superlative or vague-quantity claim that the validators flag is one a real investor will ask about in due diligence. Better to fix it now.
Pitch written to {path}.
Shape: {one-pager | exec-summary | deck-content}
Audience: {investor | grant | partner}
Word count: {N}
Sources used: {list}
Sections with source backing: {N} / {M}
Sections with TODO/placeholder (you need to fill these): {list}
Validators: grounding {pass|N flagged}, overpromise {pass|N flagged}
Specific things to verify before sending:
- {list of claims that needed user judgment to keep}
- {team/financial/legal claims user must provide}
elevator-pitch.narrate-project in this plugin.explain-document in this plugin.scripts/ dir.npx claudepluginhub radorigin-llc/rad-claude-skills --plugin rad-explainProvides behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes, focusing on simplicity, surgical changes, assumption surfacing, and verifiable success criteria.
Searches, retrieves, and installs Agent Skills from prompts.chat registry using MCP tools like search_skills and get_skill. Activates for finding skills, browsing catalogs, or extending Claude.