Idea evaluation fails when founders fall in love with the idea and only hire AI to confirm them. These prompts force honest critique — market, moat, distribution, unit economics, why-now — and produce a kill criterion in writing. Once an idea survives this gauntlet, you usually need a pricing read before building — that’s where the pre-launch pricing hypothesis workflow takes over.
Best for
- Pre-build validation
- Pre-fundraise sharpening
- Pivot decisions when traction is flat
- Side-project / weekend-build filter
- YC / accelerator app prep
1. One-paragraph brutal critique
My startup idea: {description}. Write a 200-word critique. Required: (a) realistic market size in one line with the assumption that drives it, (b) who actually pays and what they pay today instead, (c) why now (and why not 3 years ago / 3 years from now), (d) the single biggest risk, (e) what would kill this in 6 months. Tone: honest VC partner, not cheerleader. End with a yes / no / iterate verdict and one sentence of reasoning.2. Market sizing sketch with sensitivity
Idea: {description}. Sketch market sizing: TAM / SAM / SOM with explicit assumptions stated separately for each number. Then run sensitivity: which 2 assumptions, if wrong by 2×, would change the conclusion? Flag any number you had to invent vs source. Conclude with: is this market big enough for a venture-scale outcome, a lifestyle business, or neither?3. Moat audit
For my idea {description}, identify what moats could plausibly develop: (a) network effects, (b) data advantage, (c) brand / trust, (d) switching cost, (e) economies of scale, (f) regulatory, (g) embedded workflow. Rank by likelihood specifically FOR THIS idea, not in general. Most early ideas have no moat at the start — if so, say so, and describe the path to building one within 24 months.4. Distribution channel test
For idea {description}, identify 5 distribution channels (SEO, paid ads, communities, partnerships, sales, content, marketplace, virality, etc.). For each: (a) cost to get the first 100 paying users, (b) scalability past 10,000, (c) which competitors / adjacent products already win this channel, (d) my unfair advantage in this channel if any. Pick the top 2 to test in the next 30 days and what "working" looks like.5. Unit economics sketch
Sketch rough unit economics for {idea}: ARPU or revenue per user / month, COGS (hosting, API costs, fulfillment, support), gross margin %, CAC estimate by channel, payback period in months, LTV / CAC ratio. State assumptions explicitly. Flag the most uncertain number — the one that, if I'm wrong by 50%, breaks the model. Compare to a healthy SaaS benchmark for this segment.6. “Why now” sharpening
For idea {description}, sharpen the "why now" thesis. Identify what specifically changed in: (a) technology / model capability, (b) regulation, (c) user behavior, (d) cost structure, (e) distribution channel. The change must be recent (≤24 months) and specific (not "AI is hot"). If you can't name a real change, the answer is "it isn't now" — say so. End with a 1-sentence why-now you could open a pitch with.7. Kill criteria with deadlines
For idea {description}, define 3 kill criteria. Each: (a) a specific measurable threshold (e.g., "<5% of waitlist converts to paid pilot", "interview signal: <3 of 20 prospects say this is a top-3 problem"), (b) a deadline ≤8 weeks from start, (c) what I will do if it triggers (kill, pivot to {direction}, double down with more funding). The point: pre-commit so I don't move the goalposts when I'm emotional.8. Pivot menu when traction is flat
Idea {idea} has been live for {N weeks} with weak traction: {paste numbers}. Suggest 4 pivots without abandoning the core insight: (a) same product, change of audience, (b) same audience, change of pricing model, (c) same audience, change of distribution channel, (d) same audience, change of core feature. For each, name the smallest 2-week test to validate and what success looks like.9. Customer interview script for validation
For idea {description}, write a 30-minute customer discovery interview script. Rules: no leading questions, no pitching the idea until minute 25. Sections: (a) current state — how do they solve this today, what do they hate, (b) recent specific stories of the problem, (c) what they have tried and abandoned, (d) what they pay for adjacent solutions, (e) brief reveal + reaction, (f) "would you pay $X" handled honestly. Include the 10 questions plus probes.10. Competitor honesty audit
For idea {description}, list the top 5 alternatives a customer uses today (including "spreadsheet", "an intern", "nothing"). For each: their pricing, the job they do well, where they fail. Then name what I would actually be 10× better at — not 10% — and the customer for whom that 10× matters enough to switch. If I can't name that customer, the idea is "feature, not company".11. Founder-market fit check
Background on me as founder: {paste — experience, network, what I'm uniquely positioned to see}. Idea: {description}. Assess founder-market fit honestly: (a) why am I the right person to build this — specific reasons, not "I'm passionate", (b) what I don't know that I'd need to learn or hire, (c) who else has tried this and what they had that I don't, (d) the unfair advantage I have that a generic founder wouldn't. End with a fit score 1-10 and why.12. 12-month pre-mortem
Imagine it is 12 months from now and the startup {idea} has failed. Write the pre-mortem from that future: (a) what specifically happened — the 3 things that went wrong in order, (b) what we kept telling ourselves to ignore the signal, (c) the moment we should have killed or pivoted but didn't, (d) what the team and investor calls were like at the end. Now translate each failure mode into a leading indicator we should track from week 1.Common mistakes
- Evaluating only the upside, never the failure modes
- No kill criteria — every result feels “encouraging” in hindsight
- Skipping distribution entirely, assuming “we’ll figure it out post-PMF”
- Believing customer interview lip-service (“I’d totally pay for that”) over behavior
- Pivoting endlessly without finishing one validation cycle