cfo-review — quality + safety report
In the Skillier index (alireza__cfo-review) · scanned 2026-06-03 · engine: builtin+triage
1 heuristic flag to review
Heuristic flags from the builtin scanner, which is known to over-flag (it trips on legitimate env-reading integrations, security skills, and library .eval calls). This is NOT an authoritative malicious verdict — re-scan with SkillSpector for the authoritative result. Run the authoritative scan →
📇 This skill is in the Skillier index (curated · deduped · quality-filtered). Install Skillier to route & load it into your AI client.
Quality notes
No quality issues flagged. ✓
About this skill
/cs:cfo-review <plan — Numerate-skeptic interrogation of any plan that touches money. Unit economics, runway, dilution, capital allocation.
📄 Read the SKILL.md
--- name: "cfo-review" description: "/cs:cfo-review <plan> — Numerate-skeptic interrogation of any plan that touches money. Unit economics, runway, dilution, capital allocation." --- # /cs:cfo-review — CFO Forcing Questions **Command:** `/cs:cfo-review <plan>` The numerate skeptic stress-tests anything that touches money. Six questions before any spend or fundraise. ## When to Run - Before approving any spend > 1% of revenue - Before opening a new hiring requisition - Before any fundraise conversation - Before changing pricing or unit economics - Before signing a multi-year contract ## The Six CFO Questions ### 1. Burn & Runway **What's the burn multiple and how many months of cash remain at base / bull / bear?** - Burn multiple = Net burn ÷ Net new ARR. Above 2x is a problem. - If bear case < 12 months, you're already in fundraising mode. ### 2. Unit Economics **What is LTV / CAC per channel, and what's the payback period on the top-2 channels?** - LTV / CAC > 3x is healthy. Payback < 12 months is healthy. - If either is broken, do not scale that channel. ### 3. Dilution Path **If this plan requires a raise, what's the dilution at base and bear valuations?** - Founder dilution per round. - Cumulative dilution to next 2 rounds. ### 4. Capital Allocation Alternative **If this dollar wasn't spent here, where else could it go and what's the expected return?** - Three alternatives: hiring, product, marketing. - Make the opportunity cost explicit. ### 5. Revenue Quality **What's the gross margin, and how does it trend at scale?** - If margin compresses with scale, the model is broken. - Cost-of-revenue should grow slower than revenue. ### 6. Bear Case Survival **If revenue is 50% of plan, does the company survive 18 months?** - Default-alive is non-negotiable. - If not, identify the cut triggers in advance. ## Workflow 1. **Run the numbers:** ```bash python ../../../skills/cfo-advisor/scripts/burn_rate_calculator.py python ../../../skills/cfo-advisor/scripts/unit_economics_analyzer.py python ../../../skills/cfo-advisor/scripts/fundraising_model.py ``` 2. **Answer all six questions** with numbers, not adjectives. 3. **Apply the verdict:** - 🟢 GREEN — fund it - 🟡 YELLOW — fund with cut triggers - 🔴 RED — kill or revise ## Output Format ```markdown # CFO Review: <plan> **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD **Reviewer:** cs-cfo-advisor ## Numbers - Burn multiple: X.Xx - Runway (base/bull/bear): X / X / X months - LTV/CAC top channel: X.Xx, payback Y months - Gross margin: X% (trend: Y) - Dilution this round: X% - Bear-case survival: PASS / FAIL ## Verdict 🟢 GREEN | 🟡 YELLOW | 🔴 RED ## Conditions (if YELLOW) - Cut trigger: <metric> < <threshold> → <action> - Review checkpoint: <date> ## Recommendation [3 concrete next steps] ``` ## Routing - `/cs:decide` — log the verdict - `/cs:execute` — build 90-day plan if GREEN - `/cs:boardroom` — escalate if multi-role implications ## Related - Agent: [`cs-cfo-advisor`](../../agents/cs-cfo-advisor.md) - Skill: [`cfo-advisor`](../../../skills/cfo-advisor/SKILL.md) --- **Version:** 1.0.0
Want a live grade + an embeddable README badge? Run your skill through the free scanner.
Graded independently by Skillproof — nothing to sell the author. Quality is mechanical + corpus-grounded; safety flags are heuristic (builtin+triage), not a malicious verdict.