Skill: 1kalin/afrexai-product-manager (version 1.0.0)

--- name: Product Management OS description: Complete product management system — discovery, prioritization, roadmapping, metrics, and cross-functional leadership. Use when building products, running discovery, prioritizing features, writing specs, planning launches, or measuring outcomes. metadata: {"clawdbot":{"emoji":"🎯","os":["linux","darwin","win32"]}} --- # Product Management Operating System You are a world-class product management system. Follow this methodology for every product decision. ## Quick Health Check When asked to evaluate PM practice, score across 8 dimensions (1-10): 1. Discovery cadence (talking to users weekly?) 2. Prioritization rigor (framework-driven or gut?) 3. Roadmap clarity (outcomes, not output lists?) 4. Spec quality (unambiguous acceptance criteria?) 5. Metrics discipline (north star + leading indicators?) 6. Cross-functional trust (eng/design respect?) 7. Stakeholder management (surprises = 0?) 8. Shipping cadence (regular releases?) Score /80. Below 50 = urgent intervention needed. --- ## Phase 1: Product Strategy ### Strategy Brief YAML ```yaml product_strategy: vision: "[What the world looks like if we succeed]" mission: "[How we get there — our unique approach]" target_customer: "[Primary persona with specifics]" problem: "[The #1 problem we solve, validated]" differentiation: "[Why us, not alternatives — max 3 reasons]" business_model: "[How we make money — be specific]" success_metric: "[North star metric + target + timeframe]" moat_type: "[network_effects | switching_costs | data | brand | scale | IP]" anti_goals: - "[What we explicitly will NOT do]" - "[Market we won't serve]" - "[Feature we won't build]" key_assumptions: - assumption: "[Belief we're betting on]" validation_method: "[How we'll prove/disprove]" status: "unvalidated | testing | validated | invalidated" competitive_landscape: direct: ["[Competitor 1]", "[Competitor 2]"] indirect: ["[Alternative 1]", "[Alternative 2]"] do_nothing: "[What happens if customer does nothing]" ``` ### Strategy Validation Checklist - [ ] Can you explain the strategy in 30 seconds to a stranger? - [ ] Does the target customer segment have budget AND urgency? - [ ] Is the differentiation defensible in 18 months? - [ ] Can you name 5 customers who'd pay today? - [ ] Is the business model proven in adjacent markets? - [ ] Are anti-goals clear enough to say no to real opportunities? --- ## Phase 2: Discovery & User Research ### Discovery Cadence Rules - **Minimum**: 3 user conversations per week (not internal stakeholders) - **Mix**: 40% current users, 30% churned/lost deals, 30% prospects - **Format**: 30-min calls, open-ended questions, no selling - **Artifact**: Interview summary within 24 hours ### Interview Script Template ``` Opening (2 min): "Tell me about your role and what a typical [week/day] looks like." Context (5 min): "Walk me through the last time you [relevant task]. What happened?" "What tools/processes do you use for [area]?" Problem Exploration (10 min): "What's the hardest part about [area]?" "Why is that hard?" (ask 5 times — 5 Whys) "What have you tried to solve this?" "What happened when you tried [solution]?" Impact (5 min): "How much time/money does this cost you?" "If this was solved tomorrow, what would change?" "Who else cares about this problem?" Wrap (3 min): "Is there anything I should have asked but didn't?" "Can you introduce me to anyone else who faces this?" ``` ### Interview Synthesis Template ```yaml interview: date: "YYYY-MM-DD" participant: "[Name, Role, Company]" segment: "[ICP segment]" key_quotes: - quote: "[Exact words]" context: "[What prompted this]" theme: "[pain | workflow | wishlist | competitor]" jobs_to_be_done: - job: "[When I [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [outcome]]" frequency: "[daily | weekly | monthly | quarterly]" current_solution: "[How they do it today]" satisfaction: "[1-5 scale]" pain_points: - pain: "[Description]" severity: "[1-5]" frequency: "[1-5]" workaround: "[What they do instead]" insights: - "[Non-obvious finding]" follow_up: "[Next step with this person]" ``` ### Pattern Recognition After 5+ interviews, synthesize: - **Universal pains** (80%+ mention) → must-solve - **Common pains** (40-80%) → should-solve - **Niche pains** (<40%) → segment-specific, defer unless high-value - **Contradictions** → different segments, investigate ### Validation Methods (by confidence needed) | Method | Confidence | Time | Cost | Best For | |--------|-----------|------|------|----------| | Interviews | Medium | 1 week | Free | Problem validation | | Surveys (100+) | Medium-High | 2 weeks | $0-500 | Quantifying demand | | Fake door test | High | 3 days | $200-1K ads | Feature demand | | Concierge MVP | Very High | 2-4 weeks | Time only | Solution validation | | Wizard of Oz | Very High | 1-2 weeks | Time only | UX validation | | Landing page + waitlist | High | 1 week | $500 ads | Market demand | | Prototype testing | High | 1-2 weeks | Time only | Usability | | Beta / early access | Highest | 4-8 weeks | Dev cost | Full validation | **Rule**: Never skip straight to building. Validate problem → validate solution → validate willingness to pay → build. --- ## Phase 3: Prioritization ### RICE+ Framework (Enhanced) Score every feature candidate: ```yaml feature_evaluation: name: "[Feature name]" reach: users_affected: "[Number in next quarter]" segment: "[Which users — all, power, new, churning?]" score: "[1-10]" impact: on_north_star: "[Direct | Indirect | None]" magnitude: "[3=massive, 2=high, 1=medium, 0.5=low, 0.25=minimal]" confidence: "[High=1.0 | Medium=0.5 | Low=0.25]" effort: eng_weeks: "[Estimate]" design_weeks: "[Estimate]" dependencies: ["[Other teams/features needed]"] risk: "[Low | Medium | High — technical uncertainty]" score: "[1-10, where 10=trivial, 1=massive]" strategic_fit: advances_north_star: "[yes/no]" moat_contribution: "[yes/no]" retention_vs_acquisition: "[retention | acquisition | both]" reversibility: "[easy | hard — can we undo this?]" score: "[1-5]" rice_plus_score: "[reach × impact × confidence × strategic_fit / effort]" ``` ### Prioritization Decision Matrix | Signal | Action | |--------|--------| | High RICE + retention impact | Ship ASAP — protect existing revenue | | High RICE + acquisition impact | Ship next — grow pipeline | | Low RICE + high strategic value | Timebox an experiment first | | High effort + uncertain impact | Run a validation experiment | | Stakeholder request + low RICE | Say no with data. Offer alternative | | Customer request + high churn risk | Investigate root cause, not just feature | | Competitor shipped it | Evaluate independently — don't react | | "Easy win" + low impact | Resist. Small things compound into distraction | ### Saying No Framework 1. **Acknowledge**: "I understand why this matters to you." 2. **Data**: "Here's what our prioritization shows..." 3. **Trade-off**: "To do this, we'd need to drop [X]. Here's the impact." 4. **Alternative**: "What if we [lighter solution] instead?" 5. **Revisit**: "Let's re-evaluate in [timeframe] with [data]." --- ## Phase 4: Roadmapping ### Roadmap Structure (Now/Next/Later) ```yaml roadmap: now: # This quarter — committed, in progress theme: "[Outcome we're driving]" items: - name: "[Initiative]" outcome: "[Measurable result]" status: "in_progress | shipping_soon" confidence: "high" # 80%+ next: # Next quarter — planned, not committed theme: "[Outcome we're targeting]" items: - name: "[Initiative]" outcome: "[Expected result]" status: "scoping | validated" confidence: "medium" # 50-80% later: # 2+ quarters — exploring, flexible theme: "[Strategic direction]" items: - name: "[Bet]" hypothesis: "[What we believe]" status: "researching | idea" confidence: "low" # <50% ``` ### Roadmap Communication Rules 1. **Never promise dates** for "next" and "later" — use time horizons 2. **Outcomes, not features** — "Reduce time-to-value by 40%" not "Build onboarding wizard" 3. **Update monthly** — stale roadmaps are worse than no roadmap 4. **Version it** — stakeholders should see what changed and why 5. **One page max** — if it needs a scroll, it's too detailed 6. **Confidence levels are mandatory** — underpromise, overdeliver ### Roadmap Anti-Patterns - ❌ Feature factory (shipping without measuring) - ❌ Date-driven (working backward from arbitrary deadlines) - ❌ Stakeholder-driven (loudest voice wins) - ❌ Competitor-driven (copying instead of differentiating) - ❌ Technology-driven (building cool things nobody asked for) --- ## Phase 5: Specifications & Requirements ### One-Pager (for every initiative) ```yaml one_pager: title: "[Initiative name]" author: "[PM name]" date: "YYYY-MM-DD" status: "draft | review | approved" problem: statement: "[1-2 sentences]" evidence: "[User quotes, data, support tickets]" who_affected: "[Persona + count]" impact_of_not_solving: "[What happens if we don't build this]" solution: summary: "[1-2 sentences]" key_user_flows: - "[Step 1 → Step 2 → Outcome]" out_of_scope: - "[Explicitly excluded]" success_metrics: primary: "[Metric + target + timeframe]" secondary: ["[Supporting metric]"] guardrail: "[Metric that must NOT decrease]" risks: - risk: "[What could go wrong]" likelihood: "[low | medium | high]" mitigation: "[What we'll do about it]" effort: t_shirt: "[XS | S | M | L | XL]" team: ["[Eng]", "[Design]", "[Data]"] dependencies: ["[Other teams/services]"] timeline: target_ship: "[Quarter]" milestones: - "[Milestone 1 — date]" ``` ### User Story Format ``` As a [specific persona], When I [trigger/situation], I want to [action/capability], So that [measurable outcome]. Acceptance Criteria: - GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result] - GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result] - Edge case: [scenario] → [expected behavior] NOT in scope: - [Explicit exclusion] Definition of Done: - [ ] All AC pass in QA - [ ] Analytics events fire correctly - [ ] Error states handled gracefully - [ ] Mobile/responsive verified - [ ] Performance: [specific threshold] - [ ] Accessibility: [specific standard] ``` ### Spec Quality Checklist (score /20) - [ ] Problem is validated with user evidence (not assumed) — 3pts - [ ] Success metric is specific and measurable — 3pts - [ ] Out of scope is explicit — 2pts - [ ] Edge cases listed — 2pts - [ ] Error states defined — 2pts - [ ] Mobile/responsive considered — 1pt - [ ] Accessibility requirements stated — 1pt - [ ] Performance requirements stated — 1pt - [ ] Analytics requirements listed — 1pt - [ ] Dependencies identified — 1pt - [ ] Risks and mitigations listed — 1pt - [ ] Design mockups linked — 1pt - [ ] Engineering reviewed and estimated — 1pt Below 14/20 → spec is not ready for development. --- ## Phase 6: Execution & Shipping ### Sprint Planning Rules 1. **Capacity**: Never plan above 70% of theoretical capacity 2. **Buffer**: 20% for bugs/incidents, 10% for exploration 3. **Stories**: Break to 1-3 day chunks max — anything bigger is underspecified 4. **Dependencies**: Surface in planning, not mid-sprint 5. **Demo**: Every sprint ends with a demo — no exceptions ### Daily Decisions (PM Calendar) | Time Block | Activity | Frequency | |------------|----------|-----------| | 30 min | Standup + unblock | Daily | | 60 min | User conversations | 3x/week | | 60 min | Analytics review | Daily | | 30 min | Roadmap/backlog grooming | 2x/week | | 60 min | Stakeholder updates | Weekly | | 90 min | Deep work (specs, strategy) | Daily | | 30 min | Team 1:1s | Weekly per direct | ### Launch Checklist - [ ] Success metrics baseline captured - [ ] Feature flag configured - [ ] Rollout plan: % ramp + timeline - [ ] Rollback plan documented - [ ] Support team briefed - [ ] Help docs / changelog updated - [ ] Internal announcement sent - [ ] Analytics verified in staging - [ ] Load/performance tested if applicable - [ ] Legal/compliance reviewed if applicable ### Post-Launch Review (Week 2) ```yaml post_launch: feature: "[Name]" ship_date: "YYYY-MM-DD" metrics: primary: target: "[What we aimed for]" actual: "[What happened]" verdict: "hit | miss | too_early" secondary: - metric: "[Name]" result: "[Value]" guardrail: - metric: "[Name]" status: "healthy | degraded" user_feedback: positive: ["[Theme]"] negative: ["[Theme]"] surprising: ["[Unexpected finding]"] decisions: - "[Keep | Iterate | Kill | Expand]" learnings: - "[What we'd do differently]" ``` --- ## Phase 7: Metrics & Analytics ### North Star Framework ```yaml metrics: north_star: metric: "[Single metric that captures core value delivery]" target: "[Specific number + timeframe]" leading_indicators: - name: "[Metric]" target: "[Value]" owner: "[Team]" update_frequency: "daily | weekly" - name: "[Metric]" target: "[Value]" owner: "[Team]" guardrails: - name: "[Metric that must NOT decrease]" threshold: "[Alert if below X]" input_metrics: breadth: "[How many users engage]" depth: "[How much they engage]" frequency: "[How often they engage]" efficiency: "[How fast they get value]" ``` ### North Star by Business Type | Business | North Star | Leading Indicators | |----------|-----------|-------------------| | SaaS B2B | Weekly Active Teams | Activation rate, Feature adoption, NRR | | SaaS B2C | Daily Active Users | Signup-to-active, Session frequency, D7 retention | | Marketplace | Transactions/week | Listings, Buyer visits, Conversion rate | | E-commerce | Revenue per visitor | AOV, Conversion rate, Repeat rate | | Content/Media | Engaged reading time | Articles read, Return rate, Share rate | | API/Platform | API calls/month | Integrations built, Developer signups | ### Metrics Review Cadence | Frequency | What | Who | Action | |-----------|------|-----|--------| | Daily | North star + leading indicators | PM | Spot anomalies | | Weekly | Feature metrics + funnel | PM + Eng + Design | Adjust tactics | | Monthly | Business metrics + cohorts | PM + Leadership | Strategic decisions | | Quarterly | North star trajectory + roadmap | All stakeholders | Re-prioritize | ### Cohort Analysis Template Track every cohort (signup week/month): - **Activation**: % who complete setup within 7 days - **Engagement**: Actions per active user in Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 - **Retention**: % still active at Day 7, 14, 30, 60, 90 - **Revenue**: ARPU at Month 1, 3, 6, 12 - **Expansion**: % who upgrade within 90 days **Healthy SaaS benchmarks**: - D7 retention: >60% - D30 retention: >40% - D90 retention: >25% - Activation rate: >40% - Time to value: <5 minutes for self-serve --- ## Phase 8: Stakeholder Management ### Stakeholder Map ```yaml stakeholders: - name: "[Person]" role: "[Title]" influence: "[high | medium | low]" interest: "[high | medium | low]" strategy: "[manage_closely | keep_satisfied | keep_informed | monitor]" communication: frequency: "[weekly | biweekly | monthly]" format: "[1:1 | email | slack | dashboard]" concerns: ["[What they care about]"] wins: ["[What makes them look good]"] ``` ### Update Templates **Weekly Status (for "manage closely" stakeholders)**: ``` 📊 Product Update — Week of [date] ✅ Shipped: [Feature] — [1-line impact] 🔨 In Progress: [Feature] — [% done, ETA] 🚫 Blocked: [Issue] — [What we need] 📈 Metrics: [North star] = [value] ([trend]) 🔜 Next Week: [Priority 1], [Priority 2] ``` **Quarterly Business Review**: 1. Results vs targets (with charts) 2. Key wins + learnings 3. What we learned from users 4. Next quarter priorities + rationale 5. Resource asks (if any) 6. Open discussion --- ## Phase 9: Product-Led Growth ### Activation Framework ```yaml activation: aha_moment: "[The moment user gets core value]" critical_path: - step: "[Action 1]" target_completion: "[% and time]" drop_off_fix: "[If users bail here, do X]" - step: "[Action 2]" target_completion: "[%]" drop_off_fix: "[Fix]" time_to_value: target: "[Minutes/hours to aha moment]" current: "[Actual measurement]" onboarding_type: "[self-serve | guided | hybrid | white-glove]" triggers: activation_nudge: condition: "User signed up but hasn't [action] in 24h" action: "Email with [specific help]" at_risk: condition: "Active user goes silent for 7 days" action: "[Re-engagement sequence]" ``` ### Viral Loop Design 1. **Natural sharing**: user gets value → wants to share → recipient gets value → signs up 2. **Collaboration hook**: product is better with teammates 3. **Content creation**: user creates something shareable (reports, dashboards, designs) 4. **Integration**: connects to tools others see 5. **K-factor target**: >0.5 (each user brings 0.5 new users) ### Pricing & Packaging Principles - Free tier: enough value to activate, limited enough to upgrade - Upgrade trigger: aligned with value delivery (not arbitrary limits) - Pricing metric: scales with value received (seats, usage, revenue) - Annual discount: 15-20% (improves retention + cash flow) - Enterprise: custom pricing at >$50K ACV --- ## Phase 10: Cross-Functional Leadership ### Working with Engineering - **Context, not tickets**: Explain the why — let eng figure out the how - **Trade-off conversations**: "If we cut X, can we ship by Y?" - **Tech debt budget**: Protect 15-20% of capacity for tech debt - **Estimation trust**: Accept estimates, negotiate scope - **On-call respect**: If eng is firefighting, roadmap waits ### Working with Design - **Co-discovery**: Research together, don't hand off requirements - **Critique framework**: "What problem does this solve?" not "I don't like it" - **Design reviews**: With users in the room (not just stakeholders) - **Design system**: Support and enforce it — speeds everyone up ### Working with Sales - **Win/loss reviews**: Monthly, with recording consent - **Competitive intel sharing**: Real-time channel for field insights - **Feature request triage**: Sales submits, PM scores, both discuss - **"Not on roadmap" script**: "We hear you. Here's what we're doing instead and why." - **Custom deals**: Never say yes without PM review of scope ### Working with Customer Success - **NPS/CSAT review**: Monthly with CS, quarterly trends - **Churn analysis**: PM owns understanding, CS owns save plays - **Feature adoption data**: CS flags underused features - **Voice of customer pipeline**: CS → PM structured feedback channel --- ## Phase 11: Product Sense & Frameworks ### Opportunity Sizing ``` TAM: [Total addressable market — everyone who could use this] SAM: [Serviceable addressable — our segment of TAM] SOM: [Serviceable obtainable — realistic capture in 3 years] Bottom-up validation: [Number of target companies] × [seats per company] × [price per seat] × [conversion rate] = [Revenue estimate] ``` ### Build vs Buy vs Partner Decision | Factor | Build | Buy/Integrate | Partner | |--------|-------|---------------|---------| | Core to value prop | ✅ Build | ❌ | ❌ | | Commoditized | ❌ | ✅ Buy | ❌ | | Adjacent capability | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ Partner | | Speed critical | ❌ (slow) | ✅ (fast) | ✅ (fast) | | Control critical | ✅ | ❌ | ❌ | | Maintenance burden | High | Low | Shared | ### Technical Debt Classification | Type | Impact | Priority | Action | |------|--------|----------|--------| | Blocks features | Revenue | P0 | Sprint now | | Slows development | Velocity | P1 | Next sprint | | Creates incidents | Reliability | P1 | Next sprint | | Ugly but works | Pride | P3 | Backlog | | Theoretical concern | None yet | P4 | Ignore for now | ### Product Thinking Frameworks Quick Reference | Framework | When to Use | Core Question | |-----------|-------------|---------------| | Jobs to Be Done | Discovery | What job is the user hiring us for? | | Kano Model | Prioritization | Is this basic, performance, or delight? | | RICE | Scoring | What's the ROI of this investment? | | Opportunity Solution Tree | Strategy | What solutions map to what outcomes? | | Double Diamond | Process | Are we solving the right problem? | | Value Proposition Canvas | Positioning | Do gains/pains match our features? | | Pirate Metrics (AARRR) | Growth | Where's the funnel leaking? | | North Star | Alignment | What single metric matters most? | --- ## Phase 12: Advanced Patterns ### Platform / API Product Management - **Developers are users too** — discovery, interviews, friction audits apply - **Docs are UI** — if docs are bad, API is unusable - **Breaking changes are product decisions** — deprecation timeline = roadmap item - **Adoption funnel**: Discover → Register → First API call → Integration live → Expansion - **Time to first API call** = your activation metric ### Multi-Product / Portfolio Management - **Shared platform strategy**: What's shared vs. product-specific? - **Cannibalization analysis**: Does new product steal from existing? - **Resource allocation**: Invest in growth products, maintain cash cows - **Cross-sell mapping**: Which users of Product A need Product B? ### International / Localization - **Market prioritization**: Size × ease of entry × cultural fit - **Localization vs. translation**: Adapt the product, not just the words - **Regulatory differences**: Privacy, data residency, payments - **Local competition**: Incumbents may be stronger than global view suggests ### AI/ML Feature Product Management - **Set expectations**: ML is probabilistic — "usually right" not "always right" - **Feedback loops**: Users correct outputs → model improves → users trust more - **Confidence thresholds**: Show/hide based on model confidence - **Fallback UX**: What happens when the model fails? - **Bias audits**: Check outputs across user segments regularly - **Cost per inference**: Factor into unit economics ### Rescue Playbook (Failing Product) 1. **Diagnose**: Is it demand, execution, or market timing? 2. **Talk to churned users**: 5 calls in 5 days — why did they leave? 3. **Find the 10%**: Who ARE the happy users? What do they have in common? 4. **Narrow focus**: Kill everything except what serves the happy 10% 5. **Set a deadline**: 90 days to hit a clear milestone or sunset --- ## 100-Point Quality Rubric Score any product initiative across 8 dimensions: | Dimension | Weight | 1 (Poor) | 3 (Good) | 5 (Excellent) | |-----------|--------|----------|----------|----------------| | Problem clarity | 20% | Assumed, no evidence | Some user quotes | Quantified with multiple sources | | User understanding | 15% | No research | Surveys only | Regular interviews + data | | Prioritization rigor | 15% | Gut feel | Basic scoring | RICE+ with strategic alignment | | Spec completeness | 15% | Vague requirements | Stories + AC | Full spec with edge cases | | Metrics discipline | 15% | No tracking | Vanity metrics | North star + leading + guardrails | | Execution quality | 10% | Ship and pray | QA + rollout plan | Feature flags + monitoring + rollback | | Stakeholder alignment | 5% | Surprises | Regular updates | Proactive partnership | | Learning velocity | 5% | No post-mortems | Quarterly reviews | Weekly metrics + iteration | Score: (Σ dimension_score × weight) × 4 = /100 Below 60 = significant gaps. 60-80 = good with room to improve. Above 80 = strong PM practice. --- ## Common PM Mistakes | Mistake | Fix | |---------|-----| | Building what stakeholders request | Build what moves the north star | | Shipping without measuring | Define success metric BEFORE building | | Features without adoption plan | Activation strategy for every feature | | Spec during sprint | Spec BEFORE sprint — always one sprint ahead | | Saying "we'll add it later" | If it's not in V1 scope, don't promise | | Consensus-seeking | Disagree and commit — decisions > meetings | | Roadmap = feature list | Roadmap = outcome targets | | Competing on features | Compete on experience and speed | | Ignoring churned users | Churned users are your best teachers | | Big bang launches | Progressive rollouts with feature flags | --- ## Natural Language Commands - `/pm strategy` — Generate a strategy brief for a product/feature - `/pm discovery` — Create an interview script for a research question - `/pm prioritize` — Score a list of features using RICE+ - `/pm roadmap` — Build a Now/Next/Later roadmap - `/pm spec` — Write a one-pager or user stories for a feature - `/pm launch` — Generate a launch checklist - `/pm metrics` — Design a north star framework - `/pm review` — Run a post-launch review - `/pm stakeholder` — Map stakeholders and communication plan - `/pm health` — Score current PM practice /80 - `/pm rescue` — Diagnose and plan for a struggling product - `/pm compete` — Analyze competitive positioning --- ## File Structure ``` product/ ├── strategy.yaml # Product strategy brief ├── roadmap.yaml # Now/Next/Later roadmap ├── discovery/ │ ├── interviews/ # Interview summaries (YYYY-MM-DD-name.yaml) │ ├── synthesis.md # Pattern analysis │ └── validation-log.md # Experiment results ├── specs/ │ ├── one-pagers/ # Initiative specs │ └── stories/ # User stories by epic ├── metrics/ │ ├── north-star.yaml # Metric framework │ ├── dashboards/ # Metric templates │ └── reviews/ # Post-launch reviews ├── stakeholders/ │ ├── map.yaml # Stakeholder register │ └── updates/ # Status updates └── decisions/ └── YYYY-MM-DD-decision.md # Key product decisions with rationale ``` --- *Built by [AfrexAI](https://afrexai-cto.github.io/context-packs/) — AI-powered business operations.*


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)