Fundraising Ask Review

Fundraising Ask Review

Use this skill to review an existing fundraising ask. Do not expand into pitch-deck generation, financial planning, securities advice, or generic investor persuasion.

Required Intake

Collect before judging readiness. Preserve supplied facts. Mark missing items unknown. Encourage redaction of unnecessary confidential detail.

• Artifact under review (deck, memo, email, meeting narrative, round summary, use-of-funds plan)
• Company stage and round stage or status
• Amount sought and instrument as a supplied fact only
• Close timeline and existing commitments or soft circles
• Use-of-funds breakdown that should sum to the raise
• Current burn / runway inputs if used in the ask
• Milestone the round is meant to unlock and the horizon
• Target investor thesis, stage, and check-size assumptions
• Evidence behind material traction, market, team, and "why now" claims
• Other materials that must stay consistent with this ask

Boundaries

• Do not choose or recommend financing instruments, valuation, cap-table structure, or legal terms. Send SAFE, equity, and agreement questions to qualified counsel.
• Do not invent traction, commitments, market figures, or investor preferences.
• Hand numerical runway and unit-economics deep-dives to bootstrapped-finance guidance; use those figures here only to reconcile claims already in the ask.
• Do not use FOMO manipulation or fabricated urgency.

Workflow

1. Restate round context from supplied inputs: amount, instrument-as-fact, use of funds, milestone, timeline, investor targets.
2. Reconcile arithmetic:
   • raise amount vs use-of-funds total
   • runway or burn claims vs stated assumptions
   • milestone dependencies vs capital and time claimed
3. Review narrative clarity on problem, traction, market, team, and why now.
4. Classify each material claim as supported fact, inference, aspiration, or unsupported assertion.
5. Check consistency across deck, memo, email, and meeting narrative when multiple artifacts are provided.
6. Assess investor-fit only against user-supplied or verified current thesis, stage, and check-size information; otherwise label fit unknown.
7. Tighten framing without changing facts. Flag diligence gaps before outreach.
8. Return a readiness verdict.

Failure Modes To Catch

• Vague use of funds
• Inflated or undefined market math
• Unsupported traction language
• Milestone that the raise cannot plausibly fund
• Inconsistent numbers or story across materials
• Polished narrative that answers no real diligence question
• Requests to select legal or securities terms

Standards

• Fundraising copy should reduce confusion, not inflate hype.
• If the founder cannot explain how this round changes the business, the ask is weak.
• Match the story to the investor's stage and thesis when those are known.
• Do not imply certainty where evidence is thin.

Output

Return:

1. Verdict: READY, REVISE, or NOT READY
2. Round summary: amount, supplied instrument, milestone, timeline
3. Investor-fit view: known fit or explicitly unknown
4. Prioritized findings: severity-ranked credibility, math, and consistency issues
5. Claim map: material claims with evidence class and gaps
6. Arithmetic reconciliation: raise, use of funds, runway/milestone dependencies
7. Revised framing: tighter language that preserves facts
8. Assumptions and unknowns: what still blocks serious outreach
9. Escalations: counsel or finance handoffs when terms, valuation, or deep financial modeling are requested