Percerno Skillsbeta
← everything it can do · finance

Cto Review TEXT

Pressure-tests engineering architecture and scaling plans by analyzing scaling cliffs, tech debt, team ramp-up, build-vs-buy TCO, SLOs, and security implications. It produces a structured CTO review with a final verdict (Ship, Sharpen, or Block) and concrete next steps.

3 uses this weeksource alirezarezvanilicence MIT
Quality gate: PASS · better answers · measured 2026-10-23
Blind-judged against the bare model on 2 requests: average lift +4.5 points (specificity, structure, method, fit).
won 1/2, lift +4.5, tokens ×16.88
Security scan: clean · 2026-10-24 · 1 files · ran in sandbox
no network calls, shell tricks, credential access or instruction tampering found in its files.

Try asking

Say it in your own words; the assistant finds this recipe by itself. Examples:

“Gennemgå vores plan for at skifte til Kubernetes inden vi starter implementeringen.”
“Vi forventer en 5-dobling af brugere i næste år. Holder vores nuværende arkitektur?”
“Skal vi bygge vores egen log-løsning eller købe Datadog? Lav en CTO-review af forslaget.”
“Review our plan to migrate the monolith to microservices before we start the sprint.”
“We are expecting 10x traffic next quarter. Does our current database setup hold up?”
“Should we build our own payment gateway or buy Stripe? Run the CTO review on this proposal.”
Try this skill from Claude, ChatGPT or a chat on your own page. Free plan, no credit card.Get started free

Good for

architecturescalingtech-debtbuild-vs-buycto-reviewinfrastructuresloengineering-strategy

Not for

Do not use this for routine code reviews, minor bug fixes, or daily operational tasks. For pure financial modeling of vendor costs without technical context, use a CFO review skill. For detailed SLO design rather than high-level reliability checks, use an SLO architect skill.

Details

When it is the right choice

Use this skill when committing to a major architecture change, planning for significant load increases (e.g., 10x growth), or evaluating a build-vs-buy decision with high financial impact. It is also appropriate when a system is showing reliability stress or when expanding the engineering team significantly.

The full recipe the assistant reads

/c-level-agents:cto-review — CTO Forcing Questions

Command: /c-level-agents:cto-review <plan>

Pressure-tests architecture and engineering scaling decisions. Six questions to surface the next scaling cliff before you hit it.

When to Run

  • Before approving a major architecture change
  • Before doubling the engineering team
  • Before a build-vs-buy decision > $100K/year
  • When a system is showing reliability stress (SLOs missed)
  • Before committing to a new platform / language / DB

The Six CTO Questions

1. Scaling Cliff

Where does the current architecture break, in terms of users / requests / data volume? - Be specific. "It breaks at 10× current load because the primary DB writes saturate." - If you don't know, run a load test before deciding.

2. Tech Debt Inventory

What's the top tech debt item, what's it costing per week, and when does it become blocking?

python ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/vendor/c-level-advisor/cto-advisor/scripts/tech_debt_analyzer.py

3. Team Scaling

For each open req, what's the ramp time and contribution model?

python ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/vendor/c-level-advisor/cto-advisor/scripts/team_scaling_calculator.py

4. Build vs Buy

Why are we building this instead of buying it — and what's the 3-year TCO of each? - If "we want control" or "it's not that hard" — push back. - If the answer is "this is our core moat," build.

5. SLO / Reliability

What are the SLOs for this system and what's the current error budget burn? - Without an SLO, you can't reason about reliability tradeoffs. - See engineering/slo-architect for SLO design.

6. Security & Compliance Surface

What does this expose, and has cs-ciso-advisor signed off? - Architecture decisions are compliance decisions. - Loop in cs-ciso-advisor before commit.

Workflow

  1. Run the tech debt analyzer + team scaling calculator
  2. Define the scaling-cliff hypothesis explicitly
  3. Cross-check with cs-ciso-advisor for security implications
  4. Apply the verdict

Output Format

# CTO Review: <plan>
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD

## Scaling Cliff
- Current capacity: <metric>
- Break point: <metric>
- Headroom: X months at current growth

## Tech Debt
- Top item: <description>
- Cost per week: $X or N eng-hours
- Blocking date estimate: <date>

## Team
- Open reqs: N
- Median ramp: X months
- Contribution model: <pairing / squad / area>

## Build vs Buy
- 3-year build TCO: $X
- 3-year buy TCO: $X
- Strategic fit: <core / context>
- Decision: BUILD | BUY

## Reliability
- SLO defined: yes / no
- Error budget burn: X% (target < Y%)

## Security
- cs-ciso sign-off: ✅ / ❌

## Verdict
🟢 SHIP | 🟡 SHARPEN | 🔴 BLOCK

## Next Steps
[3 concrete actions]

Routing

  • /c-level-agents:ciso-review — mandatory if data surface changes
  • /c-level-agents:cfo-review — for build-vs-buy > $100K
  • /c-level-agents:execute — quarterly plan
  • /c-level-agents:boardroom — for architecture pivots

Related

Version: 1.0.0

Files in this skill (2)
  • LICENSE
  • SKILL.md
Where it comes from

Vendored from alirezarezvani/claude-skills, commit 27cfcd0fb0a4, path c-level-agents/skills/cto-review, licence MIT. The upstream licence file ships inside the skill.