hailneed Founder–opportunity fit
Answer one question per theme: is there pain, is anyone paying, and is this person the right one to build it? Every score must point at evidence. No evidence, no ranking.
Language rule: write every user-facing output in the language the user is speaking with you.
Step 0 — Load inputs
- Latest
~/.claude/radar/<slug>-<date>.md(+<slug>-raw.json). If none or older than 14 days, run thescanskill of this plugin first. - Persona (optional, local):
~/.claude/persona/persona.mdwritten by devpersona. If present, read stack, strengths, risk patterns. If absent, say fit is estimated without a persona and suggest/devpersona:analyze— do not guess the user's skills. - Money proof: if
TRUSTMRR_API_KEYis set, runnode "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/radar.mjs" --topic "<topic>" --trustmrr "<Category>,<Category>" --out "<home>/.claude/radar/<slug>-money.json"and usetrustmrrmedian MRR / growth per category. Without a key, fall back to the public stats page (https://trustmrr.com/stats) and mark figures "(doğrulanmadı)" — never invent numbers. Map each theme to the closest TrustMRR category (Marketing, Developer Tools, Analytics, Security, Sales, Content Creation, …).
Step 1 — Score (0–5 each, one line of evidence per score)
| Dimension | What counts |
|---|---|
| Pain | the theme's Signal from the radar report |
| Money proof | verified startups earning in the adjacent category; median MRR; 30-day growth |
| Competition gap | how many tools already serve it; is there a free/OSS incumbent or big vendor |
| Founder fit | persona stack & strengths match the MVP; risk patterns that would hurt here |
| Effort | 5 = MVP in ≤ 2 weeks solo, 1 = months or a team |
| Platform risk | 5 = owns its data/channel, 1 = depends on one API/licence that may change |
Fit = weighted: Pain 25 % · Money 20 % · Gap 20 % · Founder 15 % · Effort 10 % · Risk 10 %. State the weights in the report so the user can override them.
Step 2 — Write ~/.claude/radar/<slug>-fit-<date>.md
- Ranking table (theme, Fit 0–100, the six scores).
- For the top 3: one-paragraph thesis · MVP scope (the one job it does, 3–5 bullets) · what to leave out · pricing hypothesis with comparable verified products (linked) · where the first 10 users are (specific communities/threads from the evidence) · the riskiest assumption and a ≤ 1-week test for it · evidence links.
- "Do not build" notes: themes that are real pain but saturated (name the incumbents).
- Persona notes: which persona traits helped or hurt each score (or "persona yok").
Step 3 — Reply
Chat: the top 3 with Fit score and a one-line why; the single riskiest assumption of #1;
then /painradar:launch for the go-to-market plan of the chosen one.