c-level-advisor/c-level-agents/skills/cdo-review/SKILL.md
/cs:cdo-review <plan> — Decision-driven Chief Data Officer interrogation of any plan that touches training data, data architecture, data productization, or data team hiring.
npx skillsauth add alirezarezvani/claude-skills cdo-reviewInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Command: /cs:cdo-review <plan>
The decision-driven CDO pressure-tests any plan that touches data strategy. Six questions before any commitment to a data architecture, AI training run, data productization, or data team hire.
If no decision is unblocked, why are we collecting / training on / productizing it?
For each data source: origin, consent flow, data class, intended use.
ai_training_data_audit.py if there's any AI use case in scope.Drives the centralize-vs-embed and warehouse-vs-mesh decisions.
If an acquirer asks about this data corpus tomorrow, are we ready?
data_asset_valuator.py quarterly.Tests how much you depend on a specific data source.
Wrong hire (data scientist) when right answer (analytics engineer) is a 12-month productivity loss.
# 1. AI training audit (if any ML / AI use case)
python ../../../skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/ai_training_data_audit.py sources.json
# 2. Architecture decision (if changing the stack)
python ../../../skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/data_product_strategy_picker.py profile.json
# 3. Data asset valuation (if productizing or pre-M&A)
python ../../../skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/data_asset_valuator.py corpus.json
# CDO Review: <plan>
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
## The Decision Being Made
[one sentence — which of the four CDO decisions: training | architecture | asset | hire]
## Training Audit (if applicable)
- NO-GO sources: N
- MITIGATE sources: N
- GO sources: N
- Top remediation: <one line>
## Architecture (if applicable)
- Recommended: WAREHOUSE / LAKEHOUSE / MESH
- Build-vs-buy summary: <one line>
- Kill criteria: <when to revisit>
## Asset Value (if applicable)
- Strategic value: X/10 | Moat: STRONG / MEDIUM / WEAK
- M&A multiplier: X.Xx – X.Xx ARR
- Recommended productization path: <name>
## Org (if applicable)
- Next hire: <role>
- Why this, not that: <one line>
- Prerequisite hires in place: yes/no
## Verdict
🟢 SHIP | 🟡 SHARPEN | 🔴 BLOCK
## Next Steps
[3 concrete actions]
/cs:gc-review — for any productization or licensing path/cs:ciso-review — for any architecture change touching customer data/cs:cfo-review — for build-vs-buy TCO and M&A valuation math/cs:chro-review — for data team hires (comp, ladder, leveling)/cs:decide — log the verdict/cs:freeze 90 — on multi-year infrastructure contractscs-cdo-advisorchief-data-officer-advisor../../../skills/general-counsel-advisor/ (contractual constraints), ../../../skills/cto-advisor/ (architecture capacity)Version: 1.0.0
tools
Code review automation for TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, Go, Swift, Kotlin, C#, .NET, Java, C, C++, Rust, Ruby, PHP, and Dart/Flutter. Analyzes PRs for complexity and risk, checks code quality for SOLID violations and code smells, generates review reports. Use when reviewing pull requests, analyzing code quality, identifying issues, generating review checklists.
tools
Use when planning, funding, scoping, or synthesizing enterprise research across workstreams — clinical study design, R&D program finance, market sizing/surveys, or product/user research. Triggers on "design this clinical study", "what sample size", "R&D budget", "burn rate", "capitalize or expense", "TAM SAM SOM", "market sizing", "survey design", "segment the market", "plan user interviews", "usability test", "synthesize research insights". Forks context to route to one of four Research-Operations sub-skills (clinical-research, research-finance, market-research, product-research) and returns a digest. Distinct from ra-qm-team (regulatory submission), finance (corporate close/valuation), research/grants (funding discovery), product-team (persona/journey/live experiments), and marketing-skill (campaign analytics).
development
Use when managing the money for an internal R&D program or portfolio — building a multi-period program budget with the F&A (indirect) split, tracking burn rate and runway against value-inflection milestones, or routing R&D cost items to a capitalize-vs-expense determination. Every budget output surfaces its assumptions block; capitalize-vs-expense is decision-support only and routes to a named finance owner — it never books an entry or decides accounting treatment. Distinct from finance/financial-analysis (corporate DCF, close, valuation) and research/grants (funding discovery — this manages money already won).
development
Use when planning and synthesizing product/user research as a method-and-repository discipline — selecting the right method for the goal (generative interviews vs usability test vs concept test vs validation), computing method-based saturation/sample size with an explicit confidence level, or synthesizing coded observations into insights while flagging single-source anecdotes. Never fabricates user insight; an insight requires recurrence across independent participants. Distinct from product-team/ux-researcher-designer (persona/journey artifacts), product-discovery (discovery-sprint planning), and experiment-designer (live A/B) — this is the research-ops method + insight-repository layer.