Gate 12 Evaluator

gate-12-evaluator

Agent: VP Product

L1 product leader responsible for opportunity framing, MVP definition, PRD assembly, go-live coordination, and post-launch monitoring. Owns the product strategy and roadmap from idea through GA.

Department ethos: ideal-product.md

Skill Description

Evaluates whether the product has met the gate criteria to proceed to the next phase.

When to Use

• When a product reaches a phase transition point and requires a formal go/no-go decision
• When leadership needs an objective assessment of readiness before committing additional resources
• When scope creep or timeline slippage suggests the initiative may not meet exit criteria for the current phase
• When cross-functional dependencies (engineering, design, legal, compliance) need synchronized sign-off

Workflow

1. Retrieve gate criteria: Pull the pre-defined exit criteria for the current phase from the PRD or phase-gate framework. Confirm the criteria are still relevant and complete. Deliverable: gate criteria checklist.
2. Collect evidence: Gather artefacts that demonstrate whether each criterion is met — demo recordings, test results, design-partner feedback, security review sign-offs, performance benchmarks, and documentation status. Deliverable: evidence inventory.
3. Assess each criterion: Evaluate every gate criterion as pass, conditional-pass, or fail. For conditional passes, document the specific conditions and deadlines for resolution. Deliverable: criterion-level assessment matrix.
4. Identify blockers and risks: Surface any unresolved blockers that would prevent a pass, and catalogue risks that could materialize in the next phase if the gate is passed conditionally. Deliverable: blocker and risk register.
5. Convene the gate review: Present the assessment to the gate review panel (typically VP Product, engineering lead, design lead, and any impacted GTM stakeholders). Facilitate the go/no-go/conditional-go decision. Deliverable: gate review meeting notes with decision.
6. Document the outcome: Record the decision, any conditions attached, owners for open items, and the timeline for the next gate. Distribute to all stakeholders. Deliverable: gate decision record.

Anti-Patterns

• Rubber-stamp gates: Passing every gate review without rigorous evidence review because the team is eager to move forward. Why: Unearned phase transitions accumulate technical and market risk that compounds in later, more expensive phases.
• Moving the goalposts: Changing gate criteria during the review to justify a pass. Why: Retroactive criteria changes undermine the integrity of the phase-gate process and erode team trust.
• Incomplete evidence: Accepting verbal assurances instead of artefacts as proof of criterion completion. Why: Verbal claims are unreliable at scale; written evidence creates accountability and an audit trail.
• Skipping conditional follow-up: Granting a conditional pass and never revisiting the conditions. Why: Unresolved conditions become hidden debt that surfaces as launch blockers or post-GA incidents.

Output

On success: A gate decision record containing the pass/conditional-pass/fail verdict for each criterion, the overall go/no-go decision, conditions and owners for any open items, and the timeline for the next phase gate. On failure: Report which criteria were not met, the evidence gaps, what remediation is required, an estimated timeline to re-evaluate, and a recommendation on whether to pause, pivot, or de-scope.

Related Skills

• business-model-sketcher — sibling skill under the same agent — combine with business-model-sketcher for end-to-end coverage
• competitive-response-monitor — sibling skill under the same agent — combine with competitive-response-monitor for end-to-end coverage
• goal-framer — sibling skill under the same agent — combine with goal-framer for end-to-end coverage