Launch Strategy Skill Review

Skill Quality Review: launch-strategy

Review Time: 2026-04-19 18:30:00 Review Mode: Line-by-line audit

Overall Score

Rating scale:

• 90-100: Excellent - Ready to ship
• 70-89: Good - Minor improvements needed
• 50-69: Fair - Significant edits required
• <50: Poor - Major rewrite required

What This Skill Does Well

1. [Effectiveness] The ORB framework is complete and ties external visibility back to owned channels. - Evidence: lines 31-101.
2. [Effectiveness] The five-phase launch model is clear from internal validation to full release. - Evidence: lines 105-179.
3. [Effectiveness] Product Hunt execution is broken into before, during, and after launch. - Evidence: lines 196-215.
4. [Effectiveness] The launch checklist is directly usable for team execution tracking. - Evidence: lines 300-331.

Where This Skill Falls Short

1. [Standards] version is nested under metadata instead of top-level. - Evidence: lines 4-5, Impact: standards compliance risk.
2. [Effectiveness] Missing a unified output template. - Evidence: whole document, Impact: inconsistent deliverable structures.
3. [Effectiveness] Missing Don't use when boundaries. - Evidence: whole document, Impact: over-application in lightweight release scenarios.
4. [Conciseness] Narrative and case content is long in the core file. - Evidence: lines 19-297, Impact: higher token cost.

Reusable Insights From This Skill

1. Separating channel strategy and phase strategy improves execution clarity. - Application: GTM and campaign planning skills.
2. Platform-specific subflows reduce ambiguity in launch execution. - Application: marketplace or community launch workflows.
3. Checklist delivery improves cross-functional coordination. - Application: product-marketing-ops collaboration.

Detailed Issue List

[High] Standards - Version field is not top-level

• Location: lines 4-5
• Description: required version is not defined at frontmatter root.
• Recommendation: add top-level version: 1.1.0.

[Medium] Effectiveness - Missing output schema

• Location: whole document
• Description: no required output format.
• Recommendation: add output sections for Launch Brief, Timeline, Owners, Risks, and Metrics.

[Medium] Effectiveness - Missing scope boundaries

• Location: whole document
• Description: no non-applicable scenario rules.
• Recommendation: add Don't use when for minor update announcements.

[Low] Conciseness - Core body is long

• Location: lines 19-297
• Description: case content is heavy for default path.
• Recommendation: move detailed cases to references/.

Improvement Recommendations (Priority Ordered)

1. [Must] Fix top-level version.
2. [Should] Add output schema and boundary definitions.
3. [Optional] Reduce main-file narrative and rely on references.

Dimension Notes

Standards 13/20

• Naming and structure: pass
• Required fields: fail (missing top-level version)

Effectiveness 30/40

• Framework quality: strong
• Scenario coverage: strong
• Output standardization and validation: moderate

Safety 29/30

• No dangerous commands
• Add a compliance review reminder before public announcements

Conciseness 7/10

• Comprehensive
• Better layering can reduce token overhead