paid-tier-readiness-check

$npx mdskill add lyndonkl/claude/paid-tier-readiness-check

Assess paid launch viability across four critical operational gates.

  • Identifies missing preconditions blocking successful paid tier conversion.
  • Integrates Growth Analyst reports and section-map.md for data validation.
  • Assigns readiness scores based on strict threshold comparisons.
  • Returns categorized gaps paired with actionable one-line advice.

SKILL.md

.github/skills/paid-tier-readiness-checkView on GitHub ↗
---
name: paid-tier-readiness-check
description: Evaluates whether substacker has the four preconditions for launching a paid tier — enough subs, healthy engagement, a clear candidate section, writer capacity. Produces readiness score (not-ready / close / ready) with named gaps. Used when the "should we launch paid?" question is selected or at writer's explicit request. Trigger keywords: paid tier, paid readiness, monetization, Substack paid, launch paid, 1000 subscribers.
---

# Paid Tier Readiness Check

## Four gates

All four must pass for "ready":

1. **Scale**: ≥1,000 free subs OR explicit request to evaluate sub-1,000. At sub-500, refuse with reason: 2-5% conversion × 500 = 10-25 paid, below the threshold where paid changes behaviour.
2. **Engagement**: median open rate ≥40% across last 3 months (or documented reason low-rate is acceptable).
3. **Section candidate**: at least one section has ≥5 posts AND shows differential engagement vs publication baseline. This is the section paid subs would pay for.
4. **Writer capacity**: published at least once every 3 weeks for the last quarter. Launching paid adds pressure; irregular base breaks the writer.

## Workflow

```
Per check:
- [ ] Step 1: Load Growth Analyst most recent report (for subs, open rate)
- [ ] Step 2: Load section-map.md
- [ ] Step 3: Check each of the 4 gates
- [ ] Step 4: Assign score: not-ready | close | ready
- [ ] Step 5: Name the specific gap(s)
- [ ] Step 6: One-line recommendation
```

## Output

```markdown
**Scale**: pass | fail — {N} free subs ({threshold})
**Engagement**: pass | fail — median {N}% ({threshold})
**Section candidate**: pass | fail — {section} is candidate | no section qualifies yet
**Writer capacity**: pass | fail — {N} posts in last 12 weeks

**Score**: not-ready | close (gate {X} fails) | ready

**Recommendation**: {don't launch | revisit in Q+N after X | launch with offer}
```

## Worked example (at 847 subs, Q2)

- Scale: fail. 847 < 1000.
- Engagement: pass. Median 54% over last 12 weeks.
- Section candidate: pass. `agent-workshop` shows 62% avg open vs 54% baseline.
- Writer capacity: pass. 14 posts in 12 weeks.
- **Score**: close (scale gate fails).
- **Recommendation**: Don't launch. Revisit at Q3 when scale crosses 1000.

## Guardrails

1. Never recommend launching if scale <500 unless explicitly asked.
2. Engagement threshold is 40% median — well below Substack's 45-50% benchmark for well-engaged publications. Paid works below 45% with a strong candidate section.
3. Section candidate is not just "has a section" — must show differential engagement.
4. Writer capacity is about steady state, not spikes. Once-every-3-weeks is the floor.
5. "Ready" requires all 4 gates. "Close" means 3 of 4. "Not-ready" means 2 or fewer.

More from lyndonkl/claude

SkillDescription
abstraction-concrete-examplesBuilds structured abstraction ladders that translate high-level principles into concrete, actionable examples across 3-5 levels. Bridges communication gaps, reveals hidden assumptions, and tests whether abstract ideas work in practice. Use when explaining concepts at different expertise levels, moving between abstract principles and concrete implementation, identifying edge cases by testing ideas against scenarios, designing layered documentation, decomposing complex problems into actionable steps, or bridging strategy-execution gaps.
academic-letter-architectGuides the creation of evidence-based academic recommendation letters, reference letters, and award nominations that combine concrete examples, meaningful comparisons, and genuine enthusiasm. Use when writing recommendation letters for students, postdocs, or colleagues, or when user mentions recommendation letter, reference, nomination, letter of support, endorsement, or needs help with strong advocacy and comparative statements.
adr-architectureDocuments significant architectural and technical decisions with full context, alternatives considered, trade-offs analyzed, and consequences understood. Creates a decision trail that helps teams understand why decisions were made. Use when choosing between technology options, making infrastructure decisions, establishing standards, migrating systems, or when user mentions ADR, architecture decision, technical decision record, or decision documentation.
adverse-selection-priorProduces a Bayesian prior probability that an offered transaction is +EV for the recipient, given that the counterparty chose to propose it. Applies Akerlof market-for-lemons logic -- if they offered it, they believe it is +EV for them, so the prior that it is +EV for us is materially below 50%. Reusable across trade evaluation, waiver drops (another team dropping a player is also adverse selection), job-offer analysis, M&A, and any "someone offered me this" situation. Use when you receive an unsolicited trade/offer/proposal, analyzing incoming trade prior, evaluating why a counterparty proposed a deal, or when user mentions adverse selection, market for lemons, why did they offer this, incoming trade prior, they proposed it, Bayesian adjustment on received offer.
alignment-values-north-starCreates actionable alignment frameworks that give teams a shared North Star (direction), values (guardrails), and decision tenets (behavioral standards). Enables autonomous decision-making while maintaining organizational coherence. Use when starting new teams, scaling organizations, defining culture, establishing product vision, resolving misalignment, creating strategic clarity, or when user mentions North Star, team values, mission, principles, guardrails, decision framework, or cultural alignment.
analogy-weight-checkFor every analogy in a substacker draft, verifies it carries mechanical weight — the analogy does real work explaining the mechanism, not merely decorates it. Cross-references analogy-catalog.md for novelty (is this analogy reused from a prior post?) and domain fit (biology > organizational > sports preferred; physics/military disfavored). Use whenever an analogy appears in the draft. Trigger keywords: analogy weight, decorative, mechanical weight, reused analogy, catalog check, metaphor check.
answer-uncomfortable-questionTakes one strategic question about substacker ("should we launch paid?", "is this section dead?", "are we writing for the wrong audience?") and produces the mandatory evidence + reasoning + downside triad plus a recommendation. Used 3 times per Growth Strategist review. Trigger keywords: uncomfortable question, strategic question, evidence reasoning downside, triad.
attribute-performanceFor each substacker post that materially over- or under-performs the rolling baseline (|z| ≥ 1.0), produces a plain-English attribution paragraph with calibrated confidence (high / medium / low / unexplained). Considers subject-line effect, topic zeitgeist, external share, day-of-week, length effect, and audience-notes signals. Labels unexplained outliers explicitly rather than fabricating a story. Use after compute-baseline when outlier posts exist. Trigger keywords: attribution, why did this post work, outlier explanation, performance analysis.
auction-first-price-shadingComputes the optimal shaded bid for a first-price sealed-bid auction given a true private value, an estimate of the number of competing bidders N, and a value-distribution assumption. Implements the `(N-1)/N` equilibrium shading rule for uniform private values, adjusts for log-normal or empirical value distributions, layers a risk-aversion adjustment, and caps output against the bidder's remaining budget. Domain-neutral auction theory reusable across fantasy sports (baseball FAAB, NBA/NHL waiver auctions), prediction-market limit sizing, sealed procurement bids, and any blind-bid context. Use when user mentions "first-price auction bid", "sealed bid shading", "(N-1)/N", "FAAB bid amount", "auction shading", "optimal bid first-price", "bid for sealed-bid", "blind bid sizing", or when downstream logic needs a principled shade factor rather than an ad-hoc heuristic.
auction-winners-curse-haircutApplies a Bayesian haircut to a bid valuation for common-value auctions where winning is itself evidence the bidder over-estimated. Takes a raw valuation, a value-type classification (common_value / private_value / mixed), the number of informed bidders N, and a signal-dispersion estimate, and returns an adjusted valuation. Domain-neutral and reusable across fantasy FAAB, prediction markets, M&A bids, ad-auction budgets, and any generic bidding context. Use when user mentions "winner's curse", "common value auction", "valuation haircut", "adverse valuation", "Bayesian bid adjustment", or "over-paying in auction".