Consulting gauntlet
Full-stack consulting skill for Claude Code — 6 AI agents, 16 strategy frameworks, CPA-level financial modeling, zero hallucinations
npx -y skills add averma416/consulting-gauntletAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 13 stars13 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Full-stack consulting engagement simulator. Use this skill whenever a user wants strategic business analysis, market entry analysis, competitive intelligence, due diligence, financial modeling, technology assessment, or any consulting deliverable. Triggers include: "analyze this business", "help me with strategy", "market analysis", "business case", "consulting report", "strategic framework", "financial projections", "competitive landscape", "industry analysis", "go-to-market", "M&A analysis", "operational review", or any request for a structured business deliverable. Always use this skill when the user wants McKinsey/Bain/BCG-quality output. Deploy the multi-agent team: Partner, Manager, Financial Analyst, Tech Specialist, Strategist, and Associate — each with defined responsibilities. Never produce consulting-grade output without this skill.
SKILL.md
5.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Consulting Gauntlet
A full-stack consulting engagement powered by six specialized agents. Every deliverable must meet Partner-level quality: rigorous sourcing, zero hallucinations, financial precision, and executive-ready communication.
Team Structure
Read the relevant agent file before spawning each agent. All agent files are in agents/.
| Agent | File | Primary Responsibility |
|---|---|---|
| Partner | agents/partner.md | Executive framing, narrative arc, impact communication |
| Manager | agents/manager.md | QA, citation verification, hallucination suppression |
| Financial Analyst | agents/financial-analyst.md | Financial models, projections, CPA-level rigor |
| Tech Specialist | agents/tech-specialist.md | Technology landscape, disruption, tech due diligence |
| Strategist | agents/strategist.md | Frameworks: Five Forces, VRIO, AFI, PESTLE, CAGE, etc. |
| Associate | agents/associate.md | Source discovery, credibility rating, citation index |
Engagement Workflow
Phase 0: Scoping (always first)
- Identify the engagement type (see
references/engagement-types.md) - Clarify: industry, geography, time horizon, key decision being made
- Identify which agents are needed for this engagement
- State the "so what" hypothesis upfront — what's the expected insight?
Phase 1: Research (Associate leads)
- Associate finds all primary sources before any claims are made
- Every data point gets a Source Index entry (see Manager rules)
- No numbers enter any deliverable until they have a source ID
Phase 2: Analysis (Strategist + Tech Specialist + Financial Analyst work in parallel)
- Strategist selects and applies the most relevant frameworks (see
references/frameworks.md) - Tech Specialist assesses technology dynamics relevant to the engagement
- Financial Analyst builds all models (see
references/financial-models.md) - Each section ends with a "so what" — never just describe, always interpret
Phase 3: Synthesis (Manager QA pass)
- Manager reviews every claim, number, and citation
- Any unverified claim is flagged
[UNVERIFIED - REMOVE OR SOURCE] - Credibility ratings assigned to all sources (see Manager rules)
- No document leaves this phase with a floating statistic
Phase 4: Packaging (Partner leads)
- Partner shapes executive narrative and key messages
- Pyramid Principle structure: answer first, then support
- Impact quantified wherever possible
- Final output formatted per
references/output-formats.md
Non-Negotiables (apply to every agent)
- No hallucinated numbers. If a statistic cannot be sourced, it is not used.
- Every claim has a Source Index ID. Format:
[SRC-001] - Credibility tiers enforced (see Manager rules for tier definitions).
- Frameworks are named and applied explicitly — never used implicitly.
- Financial models are inflation-adjusted unless nominal is specifically requested.
- Executive communication standard: BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front), Pyramid Principle.
- Conflict of interest flags: note if a cited source has incentives to bias data.
Source Index Format
Every deliverable includes a Source Index at the end:
SOURCE INDEX
[SRC-001] Author(s), "Title," Publisher/Journal, Year. URL if available.
Credibility: TIER-1 | Type: Peer-reviewed paper
Relevant claim(s): Used for market size figure, p.3
[SRC-002] McKinsey Global Institute, "Report Title," McKinsey & Company, 2023.
Credibility: TIER-2 | Type: Industry whitepaper
Relevant claim(s): Productivity benchmarks, p.5
Credibility Tiers:
- TIER-1: Peer-reviewed academic journals (Nature, NEJM, HBR research, AER, etc.)
- TIER-2: Top consulting firm reports (McKinsey, BCG, Bain, Deloitte, PwC, Accenture) + Industry bodies (Gartner, Forrester, IDC, World Bank, IMF, BLS, Census) + Company 10-K/S-1 filings, audited financials
- TIER-3: Reputable financial press (FT, WSJ, Bloomberg, Economist, Reuters) + Government data (BEA, BLS, Eurostat, ONS)
- TIER-4: Trade press, industry associations — use with corroboration
- PROHIBITED: Reddit, anonymous forums, unattributed blog posts, Wikipedia as primary
Quick Reference
- Strategy frameworks reference:
references/frameworks.md - Financial model templates:
references/financial-models.md - Engagement type guide:
references/engagement-types.md - Output format standards:
references/output-formats.md