Skill Concept Brief — QC Checklist

Run after writing the brief. Every item is pass/fail. Fix failures before presenting for validation.

1. IP Sourcing (Blocking)

• [ ] Kathryn's IP concepts are listed as the primary source — not existing angle files
• [ ] Every IP concept has a "What It Captures" description
• [ ] Every IP concept has a "Vault IP Source" — path to GPT file, campaign asset, micro-magnet, or concept brief
• [ ] Vault IP library searched (ip-library/ GPT assistants + micromagnet-archive-2026-3-15/)
• [ ] Campaign folders searched (campaigns/) — articles, micro-tools, calculators, skill files checked for baked-in IP
• [ ] Existing concept briefs checked (content-pipeline/concept-briefs/) for overlap or adjacency
• [ ] Adjacent existing IP is clearly labeled as reference, not source
• [ ] Every signal type / output section traces back to a specific IP concept with methodology depth noted (Deep / Partial / Gap)
• [ ] No fabricated IP — if a concept doesn't exist yet, it's flagged as new
• [ ] IP gaps identified — missing IP flagged with content interview requirement
• [ ] IP upgrades identified — existing IP assessed against Kathryn's current level of thinking. Thin or outdated IP flagged for enrichment. GPT methodology assessed for input modality adaptation (Q&A → email detection, etc.)
• [ ] Gap flags use format: "IP Gap: [what's missing]. Content interview required to extract [what]."
• [ ] Upgrade flags use format: "IP Upgrade: [what exists] at [location]. Current state: [what's thin]. Interview required to enrich [what]."

2. Problem Definition

• [ ] Problem is stated in 3 bullets or fewer
• [ ] Problem describes what the user doesn't know — not what the skill does
• [ ] Problem is specific to the audience (practice owners), not generic

3. Design Constraints (Blocking)

• [ ] Can't fail: input path defined, zero-friction test passed
• [ ] Sustainable: repeatable cadence defined (weekly/monthly/quarterly)
• [ ] Win fast: specific "how did I not see that" moment described
• [ ] All three constraints have a "How This Skill Meets It" answer — not just a checkmark

Intensive Mode — Additional Constraints (Blocking)

• [ ] Non-technical: installable by someone who downloaded Claude yesterday
• [ ] Practice Brain integration: reference files documented, graceful degradation designed
• [ ] Skill chaining: upstream input and downstream output mapped with specific section names
• [ ] Session-scoped: install + customize + run fits in ~50 minutes
• [ ] Handraiser → Intensive upgrade path documented (if handraiser version exists)

4. Quality Bar

• [ ] Specific reasons given for why this meets "fortunate they got it free" standard
• [ ] Output compared to a paid deliverable (what would this cost from a consultant?)
• [ ] Paired value with other skills noted (how does this connect to Skill #1?)

5. Input Path

Handraiser Mode

• [ ] Primary input defined (what do they paste?)
• [ ] Input is something the user already has — no assembling required
• [ ] Second input path defined (ideally: Skill #1 output)
• [ ] Zero-friction test passed (already have it, under 2 minutes, works messy)

Intensive Mode

• [ ] Practice Brain reference files documented (which files the skill reads)
• [ ] Manual input fallback designed (what happens without Practice Brain)
• [ ] Upstream skill output mapped (Sessions 2-3: which sections feed this skill)
• [ ] Downstream skill input mapped (Sessions 1-2: which output sections the next skill reads)
• [ ] Output quality difference documented (Practice Brain vs. manual)

6. Foundational Dependencies

Handraiser Mode

• [ ] Stated whether skill works WITHOUT foundational skills
• [ ] Stated what makes it BETTER with them
• [ ] For the free campaign: must work standalone
• [ ] Upgrade path to Practice Builders OS is clear

Intensive Mode

• [ ] Practice Brain files required are listed
• [ ] Graceful degradation documented (manual fallback behavior)
• [ ] Handraiser version identified (if one exists) with upgrade path described

7. Skill Output Design

• [ ] Output sections listed in a table with jobs
• [ ] Each section has ONE job
• [ ] Signal types (if applicable) listed with IP tracing
• [ ] ~6-10 sections (enough depth, not bloated)

8. Series Cohesion

Handraiser Mode

• [ ] Series arc table present with all 5 skills
• [ ] Throughline sentence consistent ("You already have...")
• [ ] Skill #1 → Skill #2 connection described
• [ ] Series position matches what was teased in prior DMs/emails

Intensive Mode

• [ ] Session arc table present with all 3 skills + input/output chain
• [ ] Upstream input mapped (which output sections from previous skill)
• [ ] Downstream output mapped (which sections the next skill reads)
• [ ] Arc narrative from Intensive Concept Brief referenced
• [ ] Handraiser → Intensive cohesion documented (same job, different capability)

9. Teaching Story

• [ ] Marked as TBD (not fabricated)
• [ ] Specific testing questions listed for Kathryn to answer
• [ ] "It was right" moment is identified as needed but not faked

10. Completeness

• [ ] Preview link at top of file
• [ ] Distribution section present (mostly TBD is fine at this stage)
• [ ] Open questions listed and numbered
• [ ] Next steps checklist starts with "Kathryn validates this brief"
• [ ] Draft skill file location noted if one exists