本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

capital-allocation

Evaluates where to spend limited capital — investment appraisal, hurdle rates, payback, and comparing proposals that are not alike. Use this to evaluate an investment or major purchase, compare competing funding requests, set a hurdle rate, decide between building and buying, or review whether past investments delivered what was claimed.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md3.1 KB
  • references/sources.md816 B

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Capital allocation

Choosing among investments is choosing what not to do. This is the appraisal of individual proposals; which businesses and bets the company should be in belongs to corporate-strategy:portfolio-strategy.

Appraise on incremental cash

Only cash flows that change because of the decision belong in the analysis:

  • Sunk costs are irrelevant. Money already spent is not a reason to continue, though it is reliably presented as one.
  • Allocated overhead is usually irrelevant. If the cost occurs anyway, it does not belong in the incremental case.
  • Opportunity cost is relevant, including the capacity consumed that then cannot serve anything else.
  • Working capital is a real outflow. Growth that consumes cash is not free because it is growth.

Discount for time and risk. A hurdle rate should reflect the risk of the specific proposal — applying one company-wide rate systematically overfunds risky projects and starves safe ones.

Read payback for what it tells you

Payback ignores everything after the threshold and so is a poor ranking tool. It is a good liquidity and uncertainty measure: how long capital is at risk, and how far into an uncertain future the case depends on.

Use net present value to decide, payback to understand exposure. A proposal with strong NPV whose returns all arrive in years four and five is a forecasting question as much as an investment one.

Interrogate the case, not the sponsor

Every proposal arrives advocated for. The useful questions are structural:

  • What has to be true for this to work, and which of those is least certain?
  • What is the counterfactual — what happens if we do nothing?
  • Where is the optionality: can it be staged so a small commitment buys information before the large one?
  • Who is accountable for the benefit after approval?

Stage-gating dominates all-or-nothing commitment where uncertainty is high. Paying for information first is usually cheaper than being right by luck.

Look back, or the numbers stay fictional

Compare realized outcomes against the approved case, and make it routine rather than punitive. Where nobody looks back, forecasts drift optimistic because optimism is rewarded at approval and never tested afterwards.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Never

  • Include sunk cost in a forward case.
  • Apply one hurdle rate to proposals of different risk.
  • Rank by payback.
  • Approve a benefit with no owner after approval.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

cbrock84/headcount2,0322026年9月18日 更新

cbrock84 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する