Structured persuasion for tech leads, PMs, and founders—not activity logs. Five scenarios (kickoff, status update, wrap-up, investor pitch, solution selling) on one 5-part framework (Hook→Context→Proposal→Evidence→Ask). AI prompts for missing materials and audience context; pre-submit checklist. Claude Code plugin; Cursor, Codex, and chat via prompts.
Resources
10Install
npx skillscat add moshuying/pitchcraft Install via the SkillsCat registry.
Languages: English (this file) · 简体中文 → SKILL.zh-CN.md
Persuasive briefings · Workflow
Essence
This is not report writing—it is persuasion. In every scenario you do the same thing:
In limited time, help a specific audience understand context, trust your judgment, and provide the support you need.
Users & scenarios
| Role | Scenarios | Audience |
|---|---|---|
| Tech lead / engineering manager | Kickoff, milestone review, wrap-up | Business leaders, CTO, PMO |
| PM / product lead | Quarterly review, annual summary, requirements review | Director, VP |
| Founder / business owner | Investor pitch | Investors, partners |
| Pre-sales / solutions | Solution selling | Customer execs, technical evaluators |
Core: 5-part persuasion framework
All briefing types share one backbone; section emphasis differs.
Part 1 · Hook
→ Why should they keep listening?
→ Opportunity / pain / urgency
Part 2 · Context
→ What is the situation?
→ What we have done and what we have
Part 3 · Proposal
→ What we will do / did?
→ Scope, path, pace
Part 4 · Evidence
→ Why we can succeed / succeeded?
→ Data, moat, team, cases
Part 5 · Ask
→ What do we need from them?
→ Decision / resources / partnership / investmentBriefing types & templates
Each type is an instance of the 5-part framework.
Project kickoff
Goal: Get leadership to approve start and allocate people and budget.
| Part | Section | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Hook | Background & opportunity | Market, pain, competition, why now |
| Context | What we already have | Team, tech, data, prior assets |
| Proposal | Goals & scope | In/out of scope, milestones |
| Evidence | Why us | Differentiation, moat |
| Ask | Resources & risks | Support needed, top risks and mitigation |
# {Project} · Kickoff
## Background & opportunity
{Why now: market, pain, competition—2–4 sentences.
This is the persuasion entry—create “we should do this.”}
## What we already have
{Team, tech, data, business assets—not bragging, but trust.
Pattern: “We already have X, so this is not from zero.”}
## Goals & scope
**In scope**: {capabilities}
**Out of scope**: {explicit exclusions—prevent scope creep}
{Milestones and timeline}
## Why us
{Core difference vs alternatives. Moat: why others can’t or won’t match.}
## Resources & risks
{People / budget / cross-team needs
Top risk and mitigation}Status update
Goal: Convince leaders and stakeholders the work is on track and worth continued investment.
| Part | Section | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Hook | One-line summary | 1–2 most important facts this period |
| Context | Period context | Position vs last period |
| Proposal | Key progress | By milestone or module |
| Evidence | Key metrics | Progress, quality, efficiency |
| Ask | Risks & decisions | Decisions and coordination needed |
# {Project} · Status update
## One-line summary
{1–2 facts; audience grasps core in 10 seconds}
## Key progress
{Completed items and metrics by milestone or module}
## Risks & response
Formula per item: {symptom} → {root cause} → {mitigation} → {status}
Decisions: options + recommendation—no open homework:
❌ "Dependency X uncertain—please advise"
✅ "Dependency X slipped 2 weeks. Option A (add people) vs B (move milestone). Recommend A; need Team Y support."
## Next phase
| Item | ETA | Dependencies | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|Wrap-up / annual review
Goal: Show delivered value and assets retained.
| Part | Section | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Hook | Goal attainment overview | Did we succeed overall? |
| Context | Original goals | What we committed to |
| Evidence | Quantified outcomes | Data-led |
| Proposal | Lessons & assets | What remains |
| Ask | Next phase or handoff | What happens next |
# {Project} · Wrap-up / {Year} annual review
## Goal attainment
| Goal | Target | Actual | % | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Underperformance: root cause and improvement—say it before they ask.
## Core deliverables
3–5 items, each: {what} + {metric} + {business impact}
## Lessons
- **What worked**: reusable methods / architecture / process
- **What failed**: root cause + prevention
- **Assets left**: code / data / docs / team capability
## Next
If continuing → direction, goals, key results, resources
If ending → handoff so nothing is left unsupportedInvestor pitch
Goal: Spark interest for a deeper conversation.
| Part | Section | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Hook | One-liner | Elevator pitch |
| Context | Market opportunity | Size, pain, why now |
| Proposal | Product | Solution, core features, stage |
| Evidence | Moat & traction | Tech, data, growth, team |
| Ask | Funding / partnership | Amount, use, milestones |
# {Project} · Pitch
## One-liner
{What we do, for whom, what value}
## Market opportunity
{Size, persona, pain, why now}
## Product
{How we solve, core features, architecture (brief), stage}
## Moat & traction
**Moat**: {tech / data / network / team—why others can’t}
**Metrics**: {users, growth, retention, revenue}
**Team**: {why this team can execute}
## Funding ask
{Amount, use of funds, milestones, next round goal}Solution selling
Goal: Convince customer executives your solution is the best fit.
| Part | Section | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Hook | Pain alignment | Their problem in their words |
| Context | Current state | Gaps in status quo |
| Proposal | Solution | How we solve |
| Evidence | Cases & data | Proof |
| Ask | Partnership | How to start |
# {Project} · Proposal
## Pain alignment
{Customer language for the problem—accuracy builds trust fast}
## Current state
{Why status quo fails: features, cost, efficiency, risk}
## Our solution
{How we solve; capabilities and differentiation}
## Proof
{Same-industry cases with metrics}
{If no case: POC plan or demo roadmap}
## Partnership
{Engagement model, timeline, what we need from them}Writing rules
1. Their concerns first, your story second
❌ Five minutes on how hard the team worked and how clever the architecture is
✅ First sentence answers “why should I care?”
2. Risks need judgment
❌ "Servers occasionally timeout—please monitor"
✅ "Connection pool exhaustion; scaling in progress; expected recovery tomorrow"
3. Acknowledge peer teams first
❌ "We filled a gap no one else addressed"
✅ "Team X has a mature Y; we extend with Z"
4. Metrics need source and definition
❌ "Conversion improved 20%"
✅ "Conversion +20% (June vs May, same account pool)"
5. Bad news early when it matters
❌ Wins first, then buried "but we slipped"
✅ Lead with material risks, then progress
6. No homework for the audience
❌ "Next: keep pushing forward"
✅ "Integration Wed; risk is dependency Y—owner aligned"
Workflow
Step 1 — Load memory
Read leader context, business positioning, format prefs.
Missing → ask user to supply.
Step 2 — Scenario & audience
User picks type (kickoff / status / wrap-up·annual / pitch / solution selling).
Probe audience:
□ Role and level?
□ How much do they already know?
□ Top concerns (tech / business / cost / time)?
Step 3 — Material intake
Check completeness by type; ask for gaps:
Kickoff:
□ Background / market analysis
□ Competitive landscape
□ Team capabilities
□ Goals and KPIs
□ Resources and budget
□ Timeline
Status:
□ Completed work this period
□ Key metrics (progress / quality / efficiency)
□ Risk list with judgment and mitigation
□ Next-phase plan
□ Decisions needed from leadership
Wrap-up / annual:
□ Original goals
□ Quantified outcomes
□ Lessons learned
□ Next plan or handoff
Pitch:
□ Market data and reports
□ Product demo or MVP status
□ Competition
□ Team intro
□ Financials and forecast
□ Funding ask and use of funds
Solution selling:
□ Customer background and pain
□ Alternative solutions
□ Our solution and capabilities
□ Cases or POC plan
□ Pricing or engagement model
If user says "you know everything—just write":
→ Pull from memory and prior context
→ Open with "Based on available info; may be missing XX"
Step 4 — Draft to template
Pick template; apply writing rules.
After each part, ask: "Does this answer what they care about?"
Step 5 — Final check
□ First 10 seconds feel relevant?
□ Every number sourced and defined?
□ Every risk has root cause + response?
□ No vague "needs attention" without judgment?
□ Cross-team mentions acknowledge others first?
Step 6 — User confirmation
Present → "What should we adjust?"
Format issues → add to format memoryCross-scenario migration
| From → To | Change | Keep |
|---|---|---|
| Kickoff → Pitch | Hook: business pain → market opportunity; Evidence: tech moat → traction | 5-part structure, risk logic |
| Status → Kickoff (next phase) | Progress becomes Context; accumulated risks feed Risk | Metric definitions, team narrative |
| Wrap-up → Case study | De-identify internals; emphasize customer value | Quant methods, acceptance criteria |
| Solution selling → Kickoff | Customer pain → market opportunity; cases → evidence | Structure, risk foresight |