Investment, partnership, and acquisition due diligence framework. Use for deep dives on companies, people, deals, and properties. Produces a structured risk...
Security
Deeptechnic — Technical Due Diligence Framework
Try itDeep-tech due diligence framework. Guides investment DD agents through independent technical validation, team assessment, supply chain audit, and competitor...
What it does
Deep-tech due diligence framework. Guides investment DD agents through independent technical validation, team assessment, supply chain audit, and competitor discovery. Use when evaluating hard-tech startup projects, reviewing BP technical claims, or conducting pre-investment technology risk assessment.
The skill document
Deeptechnic — Technical Due Diligence Framework
A structured system for conducting independent technology due diligence on hard-tech startup investments. The system follows a four-round iterative workflow and evaluates projects across 10 quality dimensions.
This is a meta-skill. It bundles sub-skills as references. Load the relevant reference for your current phase.
When to Use
- Evaluating a hard-tech startup's BP/technical claims
- Conducting a first-pass technical assessment before expert interviews
- Reviewing team capability gaps and supply chain risks
- Generating structured due diligence reports
Not for: Financial due diligence, legal due diligence, or final investment decisions.
Quick Start
1. Load references/skills-index.md to see available sub-skills
2. For current phase, load the corresponding reference skill(s):
- 1st round: load references/skills/deep-tech-dd-analysis + references/skills/anti-rationalization
- 2nd round: load references/skills/team-assessment + references/skills/supply-chain-audit
- 3rd round: load references/agents/tech-reviewer + agents/competition-analyst
- Before output: load references/skills/quality-gate
- After delivery: load references/skills/feedback-collection
3. Follow the Process steps in each loaded skill
4. Run quality gate before final output
The 10 Quality Dimensions
Every assessment is scored against these dimensions (0.0-1.0):
| # | Dimension | Weight | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | claim_validation | 0.20 | Independent physics-based validation of tech claims |
| 2 | engineering_migration_gap | 0.15 | Analysis of lab-to-product engineering gaps |
| 3 | per_person_assessment | 0.15 | Per-member team capability matching |
| 4 | independent_competitor | 0.10 | BP-independent competitor discovery |
| 5 | supplier_level_analysis | 0.10 | Supplier-level supply chain audit |
| 6 | independent_analysis | 0.10 | Independent vs BP-derived analysis |
| 7 | team_gap_precision | 0.05 | Precision of structural gap identification |
| 8 | quantitative_score | 0.05 | Decimal-precision scoring (3.5/5 vs 4/5) |
| 9 | priority_levels | 0.05 | P0/P1/P2 question prioritization |
| 10 | overview_page | 0.05 | Executive summary on page one |
Core Rules
- Every tech claim must have independent physics-based verification (formula + calculation)
- Team assessment must name each member individually with capability matching
- Competitor analysis must independently verify BP's claims (never trust BP's competitor list)
- Supply chain analysis must name specific suppliers, not generic "domestic alternatives"
- All output must pass the 10-point quality gate before delivery
- User feedback must be captured and structured as training data after each delivery
Workflow
Round 1 (First Pass)
- Collect public info (papers, patents, news)
- Validate core tech claims (formula + calculation)
- Assess first team capability
- Generate question list for team
Round 2 (After Team Feedback)
- Refresh model with team's answers
- Generate expert interview outline + supply chain questions
Round 3 (External Input)
- Cross-validate multiple sources
- Compile interview records
Round 4 (Final)
- Synthesize all findings
- Generate comprehensive DD report
Output Format
Reports follow this structure:
- Overview page (mandatory): Claim judgment table + core rating
- Technical analysis
- Team assessment
- Supply chain analysis
- Competitive landscape
- Comprehensive evaluation
- Open questions (P0/P1/P2)
- Next round recommendations
Report file naming: Deeptechnic___.docx
Anti-Rationalization
Claims you may be tempted to make — and why they're wrong:
| "I don't need to verify every claim" | Missed physical impossibility → failed investment | | "The BP's competitor list is enough" | BPs selectively omit domestic competitors | | "Team bio looks good, skip verification" | Cannot verify without public sources | | "This is just a quick pass" | First impressions lock in; do it right the first time |
Red Flags
- All claim indicators are integers (no real test data)
- BP describes features without technical specifications
- Multiple extreme specs claimed simultaneously
- No third-party data anywhere in the BP
- BP competitor chart shows "all wins, no losses"
- "Confidential" used as reason to hide core data
Verification
- All 6 core rules applied
- Quality gate passed before output
- Feedback recorded after delivery
- Training data appended to SkillOpt dataset
Related skills
Generate a financial due diligence checklist and analysis framework for any investment, acquisition, or partnership. Use when asked for a due diligence check...
技术尽调初筛工具,用于投资前的技术可行性评估、团队背景核查、专利验证。适用于科技创新项目的真实性核查,识别虚假技术和夸大宣传。核心能力:技术可行性评估、团队背景核查、专利备案验证、商业模式分析。
Pre-investment research and deal-memo generation for angel investors. Use when asked to "diligence [company]", "research this startup for an investment", "build a deal memo", or to prep for a founder call. Runs parallel web research with strict citation rules and produces a nine-section memo that separates verified facts from claims. Never outputs an invest/pass recommendation.
Evaluate whether an early-stage AI startup is worth joining as a technical contributor.Based on firsthand experience reflected in a detailed entrepreneurship review.
Rigorous multi-source, fact-checked research producing a cited brief. Use for any high-stakes question where being wrong is costly — market sizing, company/p...