mirror of
https://github.com/wshobson/agents.git
synced 2026-03-18 09:37:15 +00:00
feat: add Conductor plugin for Context-Driven Development
Add comprehensive Conductor plugin implementing Context-Driven Development methodology with tracks, specs, and phased implementation plans. Components: - 5 commands: setup, new-track, implement, status, revert - 1 agent: conductor-validator - 3 skills: context-driven-development, track-management, workflow-patterns - 18 templates for project artifacts Documentation updates: - README.md: Updated counts (68 plugins, 100 agents, 110 skills, 76 tools) - docs/plugins.md: Added Conductor to Workflows section - docs/agents.md: Added conductor-validator agent - docs/agent-skills.md: Added Conductor skills section Also includes Prettier formatting across all project files.
This commit is contained in:
Seth Hobson
@@ -41,11 +41,11 @@ Resolution: Insights and recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Three Pillars
|
||||
|
||||
| Pillar | Purpose | Components |
|
||||
|--------|---------|------------|
|
||||
| **Data** | Evidence | Numbers, trends, comparisons |
|
||||
| **Narrative** | Meaning | Context, causation, implications |
|
||||
| **Visuals** | Clarity | Charts, diagrams, highlights |
|
||||
| Pillar | Purpose | Components |
|
||||
| ------------- | -------- | -------------------------------- |
|
||||
| **Data** | Evidence | Numbers, trends, comparisons |
|
||||
| **Narrative** | Meaning | Context, causation, implications |
|
||||
| **Visuals** | Clarity | Charts, diagrams, highlights |
|
||||
|
||||
## Story Frameworks
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -55,35 +55,43 @@ Resolution: Insights and recommendations
|
||||
# Customer Churn Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
## The Hook
|
||||
|
||||
"We're losing $2.4M annually to preventable churn."
|
||||
|
||||
## The Context
|
||||
|
||||
- Current churn rate: 8.5% (industry average: 5%)
|
||||
- Average customer lifetime value: $4,800
|
||||
- 500 customers churned last quarter
|
||||
|
||||
## The Problem
|
||||
|
||||
Analysis of churned customers reveals a pattern:
|
||||
|
||||
- 73% churned within first 90 days
|
||||
- Common factor: < 3 support interactions
|
||||
- Low feature adoption in first month
|
||||
|
||||
## The Insight
|
||||
|
||||
[Show engagement curve visualization]
|
||||
Customers who don't engage in the first 14 days
|
||||
are 4x more likely to churn.
|
||||
|
||||
## The Solution
|
||||
|
||||
1. Implement 14-day onboarding sequence
|
||||
2. Proactive outreach at day 7
|
||||
3. Feature adoption tracking
|
||||
|
||||
## Expected Impact
|
||||
|
||||
- Reduce early churn by 40%
|
||||
- Save $960K annually
|
||||
- Payback period: 3 months
|
||||
|
||||
## Call to Action
|
||||
|
||||
Approve $50K budget for onboarding automation.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -93,29 +101,35 @@ Approve $50K budget for onboarding automation.
|
||||
# Q4 Performance Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
## Where We Started
|
||||
|
||||
Q3 ended with $1.2M MRR, 15% below target.
|
||||
Team morale was low after missed goals.
|
||||
|
||||
## What Changed
|
||||
|
||||
[Timeline visualization]
|
||||
|
||||
- Oct: Launched self-serve pricing
|
||||
- Nov: Reduced friction in signup
|
||||
- Dec: Added customer success calls
|
||||
|
||||
## The Transformation
|
||||
|
||||
[Before/after comparison chart]
|
||||
| Metric | Q3 | Q4 | Change |
|
||||
| Metric | Q3 | Q4 | Change |
|
||||
|----------------|--------|--------|--------|
|
||||
| Trial → Paid | 8% | 15% | +87% |
|
||||
| Time to Value | 14 days| 5 days | -64% |
|
||||
| Expansion Rate | 2% | 8% | +300% |
|
||||
| Trial → Paid | 8% | 15% | +87% |
|
||||
| Time to Value | 14 days| 5 days | -64% |
|
||||
| Expansion Rate | 2% | 8% | +300% |
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Insight
|
||||
|
||||
Self-serve + high-touch creates compound growth.
|
||||
Customers who self-serve AND get a success call
|
||||
have 3x higher expansion rate.
|
||||
|
||||
## Going Forward
|
||||
|
||||
Double down on hybrid model.
|
||||
Target: $1.8M MRR by Q2.
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -126,12 +140,15 @@ Target: $1.8M MRR by Q2.
|
||||
# Market Opportunity Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
## The Question
|
||||
|
||||
Should we expand into EMEA or APAC first?
|
||||
|
||||
## The Comparison
|
||||
|
||||
[Side-by-side market analysis]
|
||||
|
||||
### EMEA
|
||||
|
||||
- Market size: $4.2B
|
||||
- Growth rate: 8%
|
||||
- Competition: High
|
||||
@@ -139,6 +156,7 @@ Should we expand into EMEA or APAC first?
|
||||
- Language: Multiple
|
||||
|
||||
### APAC
|
||||
|
||||
- Market size: $3.8B
|
||||
- Growth rate: 15%
|
||||
- Competition: Moderate
|
||||
@@ -146,10 +164,11 @@ Should we expand into EMEA or APAC first?
|
||||
- Language: Multiple
|
||||
|
||||
## The Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
[Weighted scoring matrix visualization]
|
||||
|
||||
| Factor | Weight | EMEA Score | APAC Score |
|
||||
|-------------|--------|------------|------------|
|
||||
| ----------- | ------ | ---------- | ---------- |
|
||||
| Market Size | 25% | 5 | 4 |
|
||||
| Growth | 30% | 3 | 5 |
|
||||
| Competition | 20% | 2 | 4 |
|
||||
@@ -157,11 +176,13 @@ Should we expand into EMEA or APAC first?
|
||||
| **Total** | | **2.9** | **4.1** |
|
||||
|
||||
## The Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
APAC first. Higher growth, less competition.
|
||||
Start with Singapore hub (English, business-friendly).
|
||||
Enter EMEA in Year 2 with localization ready.
|
||||
|
||||
## Risk Mitigation
|
||||
|
||||
- Timezone coverage: Hire 24/7 support
|
||||
- Cultural fit: Local partnerships
|
||||
- Payment: Multi-currency from day 1
|
||||
@@ -186,22 +207,22 @@ Slide 5: "We need new segments" [add opportunity zones]
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
Before/After:
|
||||
┌─────────────────┬─────────────────┐
|
||||
│ BEFORE │ AFTER │
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
│ Process: 5 days│ Process: 1 day │
|
||||
│ Errors: 15% │ Errors: 2% │
|
||||
│ Cost: $50/unit │ Cost: $20/unit │
|
||||
│ BEFORE │ AFTER │
|
||||
│ │ │
|
||||
│ Process: 5 days│ Process: 1 day │
|
||||
│ Errors: 15% │ Errors: 2% │
|
||||
│ Cost: $50/unit │ Cost: $20/unit │
|
||||
└─────────────────┴─────────────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
This/That (emphasize difference):
|
||||
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
|
||||
│ CUSTOMER A vs B │
|
||||
│ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ │
|
||||
│ │ ████████ │ │ ██ │ │
|
||||
│ │ $45,000 │ │ $8,000 │ │
|
||||
│ │ LTV │ │ LTV │ │
|
||||
│ └──────────┘ └──────────┘ │
|
||||
│ Onboarded No onboarding │
|
||||
│ CUSTOMER A vs B │
|
||||
│ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ │
|
||||
│ │ ████████ │ │ ██ │ │
|
||||
│ │ $45,000 │ │ $8,000 │ │
|
||||
│ │ LTV │ │ LTV │ │
|
||||
│ └──────────┘ └──────────┘ │
|
||||
│ Onboarded No onboarding │
|
||||
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -310,36 +331,43 @@ Next steps
|
||||
# Monthly Business Review: January 2024
|
||||
|
||||
## THE HEADLINE
|
||||
|
||||
Revenue up 15% but CAC increasing faster than LTV
|
||||
|
||||
## KEY METRICS AT A GLANCE
|
||||
|
||||
┌────────┬────────┬────────┬────────┐
|
||||
│ MRR │ NRR │ CAC │ LTV │
|
||||
│ $125K │ 108% │ $450 │ $2,200 │
|
||||
│ ▲15% │ ▲3% │ ▲22% │ ▲8% │
|
||||
│ MRR │ NRR │ CAC │ LTV │
|
||||
│ $125K │ 108% │ $450 │ $2,200 │
|
||||
│ ▲15% │ ▲3% │ ▲22% │ ▲8% │
|
||||
└────────┴────────┴────────┴────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
## WHAT'S WORKING
|
||||
|
||||
✓ Enterprise segment growing 25% MoM
|
||||
✓ Referral program driving 30% of new logos
|
||||
✓ Support satisfaction at all-time high (94%)
|
||||
|
||||
## WHAT NEEDS ATTENTION
|
||||
|
||||
✗ SMB acquisition cost up 40%
|
||||
✗ Trial conversion down 5 points
|
||||
✗ Time-to-value increased by 3 days
|
||||
|
||||
## ROOT CAUSE
|
||||
|
||||
[Mini chart showing SMB vs Enterprise CAC trend]
|
||||
SMB paid ads becoming less efficient.
|
||||
CPC up 35% while conversion flat.
|
||||
|
||||
## RECOMMENDATION
|
||||
|
||||
1. Shift $20K/mo from paid to content
|
||||
2. Launch SMB self-serve trial
|
||||
3. A/B test shorter onboarding
|
||||
|
||||
## NEXT MONTH'S FOCUS
|
||||
|
||||
- Launch content marketing pilot
|
||||
- Complete self-serve MVP
|
||||
- Reduce time-to-value to < 7 days
|
||||
@@ -403,6 +431,7 @@ Present ranges:
|
||||
## Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### Do's
|
||||
|
||||
- **Start with the "so what"** - Lead with insight
|
||||
- **Use the rule of three** - Three points, three comparisons
|
||||
- **Show, don't tell** - Let data speak
|
||||
@@ -410,6 +439,7 @@ Present ranges:
|
||||
- **End with action** - Clear next steps
|
||||
|
||||
### Don'ts
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't data dump** - Curate ruthlessly
|
||||
- **Don't bury the insight** - Front-load key findings
|
||||
- **Don't use jargon** - Match audience vocabulary
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -20,11 +20,11 @@ Comprehensive patterns for designing effective Key Performance Indicator (KPI) d
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. KPI Framework
|
||||
|
||||
| Level | Focus | Update Frequency | Audience |
|
||||
|-------|-------|------------------|----------|
|
||||
| **Strategic** | Long-term goals | Monthly/Quarterly | Executives |
|
||||
| **Tactical** | Department goals | Weekly/Monthly | Managers |
|
||||
| **Operational** | Day-to-day | Real-time/Daily | Teams |
|
||||
| Level | Focus | Update Frequency | Audience |
|
||||
| --------------- | ---------------- | ----------------- | ---------- |
|
||||
| **Strategic** | Long-term goals | Monthly/Quarterly | Executives |
|
||||
| **Tactical** | Department goals | Weekly/Monthly | Managers |
|
||||
| **Operational** | Day-to-day | Real-time/Daily | Teams |
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. SMART KPIs
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -406,6 +406,7 @@ for alert in alerts:
|
||||
## Best Practices
|
||||
|
||||
### Do's
|
||||
|
||||
- **Limit to 5-7 KPIs** - Focus on what matters
|
||||
- **Show context** - Comparisons, trends, targets
|
||||
- **Use consistent colors** - Red=bad, green=good
|
||||
@@ -413,6 +414,7 @@ for alert in alerts:
|
||||
- **Update appropriately** - Match metric frequency
|
||||
|
||||
### Don'ts
|
||||
|
||||
- **Don't show vanity metrics** - Focus on actionable data
|
||||
- **Don't overcrowd** - White space aids comprehension
|
||||
- **Don't use 3D charts** - They distort perception
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user