jtbd-timeline

Pack Availability Guard

Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check .agents/project.json.enabled_packs. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend /pack install <pack> instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.

JTBD Timeline — Moesta/Switch Analysis

Report-First Approval Gate

Default to report-only: present findings, evidence coverage, assumptions, recommended artifact path, and proposed file changes in a pre-approval alignment page plus a concise conversation summary for user approval before creating or updating canonical research, spec, or task files.

Do not write or overwrite synthesized deliverables until the user explicitly approves, unless the user invoked an explicit write/update/fix mode or clearly asked to write files upfront. Raw evidence capture may be persisted before analysis when reproducibility requires it; report those raw paths separately and still gate synthesized research/report writes.

When stopping for approval, build and attempt to open the alignment preview page first, then ask the user to review it and approve, question, or request adjustments. Do not include Recommended next skill, Recommended next command, or downstream routing language. The approval request itself is the next action. Only emit next-skill routing after the approved artifact has been written or updated.

Staged Research Workflow

Use this staged workflow for synthesized research or report outputs that would create or update canonical research, spec, or task files.

1. Stage 1 - Research and clarify. Perform the research, run required source/code checks, and ask any needed clarification questions. Write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode uses research/_working/preliminary-jtbd-timeline-research.md; product-path mode uses research/{slug}/_working/preliminary-jtbd-timeline-research.md. Do not create or update canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1.
2. Stage 2 - Review alignment. Consume the working packet and build the review HTML alignment page. The page must render the full preliminary packet, evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML.
3. Stage 3 - Finalize approved artifacts. Consume final compiled YAML only when it has no unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts, and convert the alignment page to confirmed.

Evidence And Feedback Handling

Treat user feedback as input to evaluate, not as automatic ground truth.

• For factual, evidentiary, technical, or source-backed claims: verify against available evidence. Push back clearly and cite the evidence when the user appears to misunderstand.
• For taste, prioritization, or subjective judgment calls: weigh user feedback heavily and adapt unless it conflicts with verified evidence.
• When uncertain, say what is known, what is inferred, and what would change the conclusion.

Prerequisites

• Hard: research/icp.md (or research/{slug}/icp.md) must exist. If not, tell the user to run /customer-discovery first and stop.
• Soft: research/competitive-analysis.md, research/customer-feedback.md, specs, and codebase context when available.

Process

0. Product-Path Scope Resolution

Resolve research scope by product path before using code or app structure as a hint:

1. If $ARGUMENTS names a non-archived research/{slug}/ directory or a product-path ID whose scope_path points there, use that path. Treat {slug} as the product/app name, not the ICP, audience, or segment label.
2. If $ARGUMENTS names only research/_archive/{slug}/ or a manifest entry with status: archived or legacy status: abandoned, stop and warn that the path is archived; do not write or update scoped outputs there.
3. Read research/.progress.yaml when present. Normalize legacy active_path to active_paths on read and write back active_paths on manifest updates. Treat legacy abandoned as archived; exclude archived, abandoned, deferred, revisit_candidate, promoted, and any scope_path under research/_archive/ from active target selection.
4. If active product paths exist in the manifest, use those paths. If multiple active paths exist, ask which one to target unless this skill explicitly supports cross-path output.
5. If no active manifest target exists, list non-archived product directories under research/, excluding research/_archive/ and dot directories. Auto-select only when exactly one exists; ask when multiple exist.
6. If no product directories exist, use flat research/ single-product mode.
7. Detect monorepo/app/package structure only as a secondary hint.

When product path {slug} is active, read and write research under research/{slug}/, specs under specs/{slug}/.

1. Load Context

• Read research/icp.md — ICP segments, pain points, trigger events
• Read research/competitive-analysis.md if it exists — what alternatives customers switch from/to
• Read research/customer-feedback.md if it exists — switching stories, frustrations, trigger language
• Read CLAUDE.md, README for product context

2. Map the Switching Timeline

Reconstruct the customer's decision timeline using Moesta's six stages:

First Thought: The moment the customer first realizes something isn't working. What triggered awareness? What was the catalyzing event?

Passive Looking: The customer is aware but not actively searching. They notice alternatives, read about options, but haven't committed to change. What keeps them in passive mode? What would accelerate them?

Active Looking: The customer is now deliberately evaluating alternatives. What criteria are they using? What channels are they searching? Who are they asking?

Deciding: The customer has narrowed options and is making a choice. What is the final trigger? What reassurance do they need? What objections remain?

Consuming: The customer has switched and is using the new solution. What does the first experience look like? When does buyer's remorse or confirmation set in?

Satisfaction: The customer evaluates whether the switch was worth it. Are they better off? Would they recommend? Would they switch again?

3. Map the Four Forces

For each timeline stage, identify the four forces that drive or resist change:

Push of the current situation (drives change):

• What frustrations, limitations, or failures push the customer away from their current solution?
• What is getting worse over time?
• What events amplify the push?

Pull of the new solution (drives change):

• What about the new solution attracts the customer?
• What outcomes or capabilities are they drawn to?
• What promises or proof creates pull?

Anxiety of the new solution (resists change):

• What worries the customer about switching?
• What could go wrong?
• What uncertainty exists about the new solution?
• What learning curve or migration cost is feared?

Habit of the current situation (resists change):

• What keeps the customer with their current solution despite frustrations?
• What workflows, integrations, or muscle memory create inertia?
• What switching costs (real or perceived) exist?

4. Identify Force Imbalances

Analyze where forces are misaligned:

• Where is push strong but pull weak? (customer wants to leave but has nowhere compelling to go)
• Where is pull strong but anxiety blocks? (customer wants the new solution but fears the switch)
• Where is everything aligned but habit wins? (customer should switch but inertia is too strong)
• What is the minimum force combination needed to trigger switching?

5. Identify the Hiring Criteria

What the customer is actually "hiring" the product to do:

• Functional job: what task or outcome they need accomplished
• Social job: how they want to be perceived by others
• Emotional job: how they want to feel

6. Validate with User

Present the timeline, forces analysis, and hiring criteria. Ask for corrections, missing stages, and product-specific context.

Output

research/journey-map-jtbd-timeline.md (or research/{slug}/journey-map-jtbd-timeline.md)

# JTBD Switching Timeline

> Based on: research/icp.md[, other evidence]
> Date: [current date]
> Methodology: Moesta/Switch JTBD Timeline

## Switching Timeline

| Stage | Customer State | Duration | Key Evidence |
|-------|---------------|----------|-------------|
| First Thought | [catalyzing event] | [timeframe] | [source] |
| Passive Looking | [awareness state] | [timeframe] | [source] |
| Active Looking | [evaluation criteria] | [timeframe] | [source] |
| Deciding | [decision trigger] | [timeframe] | [source] |
| Consuming | [first experience] | [timeframe] | [source] |
| Satisfaction | [outcome evaluation] | [timeframe] | [source] |

## Four Forces Analysis

### Push of Current Situation
| Force | Intensity | Stage Most Active | Evidence |
|-------|-----------|-------------------|----------|
| [frustration/failure] | High/Medium/Low | [stage] | [source] |

### Pull of New Solution
| Force | Intensity | Stage Most Active | Evidence |
|-------|-----------|-------------------|----------|
| [attraction/outcome] | High/Medium/Low | [stage] | [source] |

### Anxiety of New Solution
| Force | Intensity | Stage Most Active | Evidence |
|-------|-----------|-------------------|----------|
| [worry/uncertainty] | High/Medium/Low | [stage] | [source] |

### Habit of Current Situation
| Force | Intensity | Stage Most Active | Evidence |
|-------|-----------|-------------------|----------|
| [inertia/switching cost] | High/Medium/Low | [stage] | [source] |

## Force Imbalances

| Imbalance | Stage | Implication | Intervention |
|-----------|-------|-------------|-------------|
| [type] | [stage] | [what this means] | [what could shift it] |

## Hiring Criteria

### Functional Job
[What task or outcome they need]

### Social Job
[How they want to be perceived]

### Emotional Job
[How they want to feel]

## Evidence Matrix

| Claim | Evidence Source | Evidence Type | Confidence |
|-------|---------------|---------------|------------|
| [claim] | [source] | Observed/Inferred/Hypothesized | High/Medium/Low |

Constraints

• Ground every timeline stage and force in ICP, research, specs, feedback, or codebase evidence.
• Do not prescribe UI or architecture — describe the switching journey, not the solution.
• Present findings before writing.
• Do not overwrite existing output without asking the user first.
• This is a sub-skill — do not emit next-step routing.

Alignment Page

When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page following ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md in this skill's directory. Output: alignment/jtbd-timeline-{topic}.html.

Default Shipping Contract

Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.