Agent Skills › Abilityai/trinity › dd-risk-scoring

dd-risk-scoring

GitHub

基于9个专家报告计算加权投资风险得分。整合创始人、技术、市场等维度，应用调整因子得出最终评分及投资建议（如投资、谈判或否决），并支持高风险项人工复核。

docs/demos/vc-due-diligence/skills/dd-risk-scoring/SKILL.md Abilityai/trinity

Trigger Scenarios

综合多个尽职调查专家报告以评估整体投资风险需要生成标准化的加权风险评分及投资建议

Install

npx skills add Abilityai/trinity --skill dd-risk-scoring -g -y

More Options

Non-standard path

npx skills add https://github.com/Abilityai/trinity/tree/main/docs/demos/vc-due-diligence/skills/dd-risk-scoring -g -y

Use without installing

npx skills use Abilityai/trinity@dd-risk-scoring

指定 Agent (Claude Code)

npx skills add Abilityai/trinity --skill dd-risk-scoring -a claude-code -g -y

安装 repo 全部 skill

npx skills add Abilityai/trinity --all -g -y

预览 repo 内 skill

npx skills add Abilityai/trinity --list

SKILL.md

Frontmatter

{
    "name": "dd-risk-scoring",
    "description": "Calculate weighted risk scores from specialist agent reports. Use when synthesizing multiple due diligence reports into an overall investment risk assessment."
}

Risk Scoring Methodology

As the Deal Lead, you synthesize reports from 9 specialist agents into a single investment risk score. This methodology ensures consistent, defensible scoring.

Scoring Weights

Specialist	Weight	Rationale
Founder/Team (dd-founder)	20%	Team is #1 predictor of startup success
Technology (dd-tech)	15%	Core IP and technical moat
Business Model (dd-bizmodel)	15%	Path to profitability
Traction (dd-traction)	15%	Evidence of product-market fit
Market (dd-market)	15%	TAM and growth opportunity
Competition (dd-competitor)	10%	Competitive positioning
Compliance (dd-compliance)	5%	Regulatory risk
Cap Table (dd-captable)	3%	Investor alignment
Legal (dd-legal)	2%	Legal structure and IP

Total: 100%

Calculation Formula

Overall Risk Score = Σ (specialist_score × weight)

Example:

Founder: 25 × 0.20 = 5.0
Tech:    40 × 0.15 = 6.0
BizModel: 30 × 0.15 = 4.5
Traction: 35 × 0.15 = 5.25
Market:   20 × 0.15 = 3.0
Competitor: 45 × 0.10 = 4.5
Compliance: 15 × 0.05 = 0.75
CapTable:  25 × 0.03 = 0.75
Legal:     30 × 0.02 = 0.6
--------------------------------
Overall Risk Score: 30.35

Risk Score Interpretation

Score Range	Rating	Recommendation
0-20	Strong Invest	Exceptional opportunity, minimal risks
21-35	Invest	Good opportunity, manageable risks
36-50	Negotiate	Proceed with caution, address key risks
51-70	Pass	Too many concerns, high risk
71-100	Strong Pass	Critical issues, do not invest

Adjustment Factors

Apply these modifiers to the calculated score:

Positive Adjustments (reduce score)

Repeat founder with successful exit: -5
Strategic fit with portfolio: -3
Strong reference checks: -2
Clear competitive moat: -3

Negative Adjustments (increase score)

Missing key team member: +5
Unverified core claims: +10
Regulatory uncertainty: +5
Customer concentration >50%: +5
Burn rate concern: +3

Output Format

{
  "risk_scoring": {
    "weighted_scores": {
      "founder": {"raw": 25, "weight": 0.20, "weighted": 5.0},
      "tech": {"raw": 40, "weight": 0.15, "weighted": 6.0}
    },
    "base_score": 30.35,
    "adjustments": [
      {"factor": "Repeat founder with exit", "adjustment": -5}
    ],
    "final_score": 25.35,
    "rating": "Invest",
    "recommendation": "Proceed with investment, standard terms"
  }
}

Red Flag Escalation

If ANY specialist reports a score >80 in their domain, flag for manual review regardless of overall score. Single-domain critical risks can be deal-breakers.