Analyzing contradictions
Skill qte77/claude-code-plugins/plugins/market-research/skills/analyzing-contradictions
A Claude Code plugin marketplace providing skills, rules, and scripts extracted from a production development workflow.
npx -y skills add qte77/claude-code-plugins --skill analyzing-contradictionsAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 2 stars2 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
Detect gaps and contradictions across all prior phases; surface cross-phase tensions, unresolved assumptions, and sales/investor objections. Run after `developing-gtm-strategy` (Phase 4).
SKILL.md
3.3 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Analyzing Contradictions (Phase 4)
Target: $ARGUMENTS
Phase 4 of the GTM pipeline. Depends on Phase 3. Reviews all prior phase outputs for internal contradictions, unresolved tensions, and gaps that could undermine the GTM strategy.
Mode Awareness
Read config/mode.md before starting:
concise— Top 3 contradictions + top 5 objections (brief)detailed— Full contradiction register, root cause analysis, resolution roadmapconservative— Surface all contradictions regardless of severity; prefer resolution over ignoringambitious— Frame contradictions as opportunities; propose bold resolutions
Inputs
results/phase-0/capability-profile.mdresults/phase-1a/competitor-map.mdresults/phase-1b/market-analysis.mdresults/phase-2/pmf-assessment.mdresults/phase-3/gtm-strategy.mdconfig/mode.md— Style and approach settings
Contradiction Detection Areas
- Phase 0 vs Phase 3: Does the GTM strategy require capabilities the product lacks?
- Phase 1A vs Phase 3: Does the channel strategy ignore how competitors already dominate those channels?
- Phase 1B vs Phase 2: Does the PMF score contradict market sizing assumptions?
- Phase 2 vs Phase 3: Does the segment prioritization conflict with PMF evidence?
- Internal Phase 3: Are ICP definitions consistent with channel strategy?
Workflow
- Read all prior phase outputs systematically
- Identify cross-phase tensions — Claims or recommendations that conflict
- Identify intra-phase gaps — Missing evidence, unsupported assumptions
- Draft objection list — What will skeptical investors or buyers say?
- Propose resolutions — How should each contradiction be addressed?
- Validate against criteria — Check
config/validation_criteria.mdPhase 4 gates
Output
Write to results/phase-4/:
contradiction-analysis.md
# Contradiction Analysis
## Cross-Phase Contradictions
### Contradiction 1: [Short description]
- Phases involved: [e.g. Phase 0 vs Phase 3]
- Tension: [What conflicts with what]
- Root cause: [Why this contradiction exists]
- Resolution: [Recommended fix or clarification needed]
- Priority: [High/Medium/Low]
## Assumption Gaps
| Assumption | Phase | Evidence | Gap |
|-----------|-------|----------|-----|
| [assumption] | [phase] | [present/missing] | [what's needed] |
## Objection Register
### Investor Objections
1. "[Objection]" — Response: [recommended response]
### Buyer Objections
1. "[Objection]" — Response: [recommended response]
## Summary
[Overall assessment: pipeline integrity score H/M/L, key blockers before Phase 5]
Rules
- Every contradiction must have a recommended resolution or explicit escalation
- Objections must be phrased as a skeptic would actually say them
- Do not suppress contradictions to protect the overall thesis — honesty here improves Phase 5