Cdo Review
/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.
Install
Quick install
npx skills add https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills/tree/main/c-level-advisor/c-level-agents/skills/cdo-reviewnpx skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill cdo-review --agent claude-codenpx skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill cdo-review --agent cursornpx skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill cdo-review --agent codexnpx skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill cdo-review --agent opencodenpx skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill cdo-review --agent github-copilotnpx skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill cdo-review --agent windsurfMore install options
Shorthand — useful for multi-skill repos:
npx skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill cdo-reviewManual — clone the repo and drop the folder into your agent's skills directory:
git clone https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills.gitcp -r claude-skills/c-level-advisor/c-level-agents/skills/cdo-review ~/.claude/skills//cs:cdo-review — CDO Forcing Questions
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.
When to Run
- Before approving any new ML model training run that uses customer data
- Before signing a multi-year data-infrastructure SaaS contract (Snowflake, Databricks, Fivetran)
- Before productizing any customer data (benchmark report, embedding endpoint, license)
- Before a major data team hire (head of data, CDO, data PM, ML engineer)
- Before M&A diligence — yours or theirs
- When the founder uses the word "monetize" near "data"
The Six CDO Questions
1. What decision does this data drive?
If no decision is unblocked, why are we collecting / training on / productizing it?- "We might need it later" is not a decision.
- "It feels like a moat" is not a decision.
- A real answer names a specific business call that requires this data.
2. What's the consent provenance for every source?
For each data source: origin, consent flow, data class, intended use.- 1st-party-TOS-only is weaker than 1st-party-explicit-opt-in.
- Bundled TOS doesn't cover material new purposes (training on PII for foundation models).
- Run
ai_training_data_audit.pyif there's any AI use case in scope.
3. Who consumes this internally — and how many distinct functional domains?
Drives the centralize-vs-embed and warehouse-vs-mesh decisions.- <5 consumers: warehouse-only.
- 5-25 consumers: lakehouse.
- 25+ consumers + federated culture: mesh.
- Premature architecture choice is the #1 cause of data-team burnout.
4. What's the M&A diligence impact?
If an acquirer asks about this data corpus tomorrow, are we ready?- Is there a documented anonymization process?
- What % of customers have MSA carve-outs?
- Are training-data provenance logs current?
- Run
data_asset_valuator.pyquarterly.
5. Can the model / decision / report be retrained / re-run / re-published without this source?
Tests how much you depend on a specific data source.- If yes → low blast radius; you can change consent posture later.
- If no → high blast radius; you've structurally committed to the source. Vet harder.
6. What role unblocks this — and is it the right next hire?
Wrong hire (data scientist) when right answer (analytics engineer) is a 12-month productivity loss.- Map the decision being unblocked to the specific role.
- Confirm prerequisite roles are in place (data engineer before ML engineer, analyst before data scientist).
Workflow
# 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
Output Format
# 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]
Routing
/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 contracts
Related
- Agent: [
cs-cdo-advisor](../../agents/cs-cdo-advisor.md) - Skill: [
chief-data-officer-advisor](../../../skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/SKILL.md) - Adjacent:
../../../skills/general-counsel-advisor/(contractual constraints),../../../skills/cto-advisor/(architecture capacity)
---
Version: 1.0.0
SKILL.md source
--- name: cdo-review description: /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. --- # /cs:cdo-review — CDO Forcing Questions **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. ## When to Run - Before approving any new ML model training run that uses customer data - Before signing a multi-year data-infrastructure SaaS contract (Snowflake, Databricks, Fivetran) - Before productizing any customer data (benchmark report, embedding endpoint, license) - Before a major data team hire (head of data, CDO, data PM, ML engineer) - Before M&A diligence — yours or theirs - When the founder uses the word "monetize" near "data" ## The Six CDO Questions ### 1. What decision does this data drive? **If no decision is unblocked, why are we collecting / training on / productizing it?** - "We might need it later" is not a decision. - "It feels like a moat" is not a decision. - A real answer names a specific business call that requires this data. ### 2. What's the consent provenance for every source? **For each data source: origin, consent flow, data class, intended use.** - 1st-party-TOS-only is weaker than 1st-party-explicit-opt-in. - Bundled TOS doesn't cover material new purposes (training on PII for foundation models). - Run `ai_training_data_audit.py` if there's any AI use case in scope. ### 3. Who consumes this internally — and how many distinct functional domains? **Drives the centralize-vs-embed and warehouse-vs-mesh decisions.** - <5 consumers: warehouse-only. - 5-25 consumers: lakehouse. - 25+ consumers + federated culture: mesh. - Premature architecture choice is the #1 cause of data-team burnout. ### 4. What's the M&A diligence impact? **If an acquirer asks about this data corpus tomorrow, are we ready?** - Is there a documented anonymization process? - What % of customers have MSA carve-outs? - Are training-data provenance logs current? - Run `data_asset_valuator.py` quarterly. ### 5. Can the model / decision / report be retrained / re-run / re-published without this source? **Tests how much you depend on a specific data source.** - If yes → low blast radius; you can change consent posture later. - If no → high blast radius; you've structurally committed to the source. Vet harder. ### 6. What role unblocks this — and is it the right next hire? **Wrong hire (data scientist) when right answer (analytics engineer) is a 12-month productivity loss.** - Map the decision being unblocked to the specific role. - Confirm prerequisite roles are in place (data engineer before ML engineer, analyst before data scientist). ## Workflow ```bash # 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 ``` ## Output Format ```markdown # 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] ``` ## Routing - `/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 contracts ## Related - Agent: [`cs-cdo-advisor`](../../agents/cs-cdo-advisor.md) - Skill: [`chief-data-officer-advisor`](../../../skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/SKILL.md) - Adjacent: `../../../skills/general-counsel-advisor/` (contractual constraints), `../../../skills/cto-advisor/` (architecture capacity) --- **Version:** 1.0.0
Related skills 6
to-prd
Turn the current conversation context into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker. Use when user wants to create a PRD from the current context.
to-issues
Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.
C Level Agents
Founder-mode executive team. 8 cs-* C-suite agents (CFO, CMO, CRO, CPO, COO, CHRO, CISO, Chief of Staff) and 17 /cs:* slash commands for forcing-question office hours, multi-role boardroom delibera...
Boardroom
/cs:boardroom <brief> — 6-phase multi-role deliberation across the C-suite with Phase 2 isolation, critic pre-screen, and synthesis. Outputs a board memo.
Brief
/cs:brief <topic> — Generate a one-page strategy brief from an office-hours intake. First step in the strategic sprint pipeline.
Caio Review
/cs:caio-review <plan> — Eval-demanding Chief AI Officer interrogation of any plan that involves AI: model selection, risk classification, cost economics, or AI hiring.