# Profit Leak Diagnoser

> >

- **Type:** Skill
- **Install:** `agentstack add skill-anugamchakra-think-like-a-strategy-consultant-profit-leak-diagnoser`
- **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior
- **Seller:** [AnugamChakra](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/anugamchakra)
- **Installs:** 0
- **Category:** [Agent Skills](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/agent-skills)
- **Latest version:** 0.1.0
- **License:** MIT
- **Upstream author:** [AnugamChakra](https://github.com/AnugamChakra)
- **Source:** https://github.com/AnugamChakra/think-like-a-strategy-consultant/tree/main/framework-skills/profit-leak-diagnoser

## Install

```sh
agentstack add skill-anugamchakra-think-like-a-strategy-consultant-profit-leak-diagnoser
```

Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.

## About

# Profit-Leak Diagnoser

The first instinct in almost any profitability conversation is to cut costs. That instinct is wrong
about half the time. Sometimes the drain is open, yes. But sometimes the tap is just running slow,
and cutting costs when the real problem is falling volume makes things worse. This skill enforces the
discipline of checking both sides before concluding anything.

## The method

Profit has only two sides: revenue and cost. Isolate which side the problem is on first, then drill.

- Revenue splits into **price × volume**. Volume splits into **customers × purchase frequency**.
- Cost splits into **fixed and variable**. Variable splits into **cost per unit × units**.

Drill until you reach a hypothesis you can test. "Profit declined" is a statement. "Profit declined
because volume fell in the mid-tier cohort while fixed costs held constant" is a hypothesis worth
investigating.

Then run the **unit-economics check**, because a business can look fine on the tree and still be
structurally broken per transaction. Five metrics, all of them, not just the ratio:

1. **CAC** — cost to acquire one customer.
2. **LTV** — value of one customer over the whole relationship.
3. **LTV:CAC** — the headline ratio; roughly 3:1 is a common health benchmark in subscription and
   SaaS businesses, but healthy ratios differ by industry, margin structure, and stage, so treat it
   as a heuristic, not a law.
4. **Payback period** — how long to recover the acquisition cost.
5. **Contribution margin** — does each transaction make money before fixed costs?

A 3:1 LTV:CAC means nothing if payback is four years. You can be structurally sound and still run out
of cash before the math works. Check all five.

## Output format

- **Profit tree:** indented decomposition, with the suspected leak branch flagged.
- **Unit-economics check:** the five metrics, with whatever the user can supply and what's missing.
- **Hypothesis:** one testable sentence naming the likely leak and its driver.
- **Fastest test:** the single check that would confirm or kill the hypothesis first. (This is the
  hypothesis-first-coach move; hand off to **hypothesis-first-coach** if the testing discipline
  needs its own pass.)

## How to run it

Default to producing the diagnosis: build the tree and run the check, but always show that you
looked at both revenue and cost so the reasoning is visible. Switch to coaching when the user
signals they want to think it through: ask them which side they believe the problem is on and why,
then push them to check the other side before committing.

## Where this breaks

The tree assumes profit drivers are independent, but they interact: a price cut lifts volume, a
volume push can raise variable cost per unit. When drivers are clearly coupled, say so rather than
treating each branch as separate. Unit economics also assume you can cleanly attribute cost and value
per customer, which breaks in businesses with heavy shared costs or long, fuzzy customer
relationships. Flag low-confidence numbers instead of presenting them as precise.

## Style

Plain language, define any metric on first use (CAC, LTV, contribution margin), no em dashes, short
paragraphs. Never open with "cut costs."

## Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

- **Author:** [AnugamChakra](https://github.com/AnugamChakra)
- **Source:** [AnugamChakra/think-like-a-strategy-consultant](https://github.com/AnugamChakra/think-like-a-strategy-consultant)
- **License:** MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

## Pricing

- **Free** — Free

## Security capabilities

Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access:

- **Network access:** no
- **Filesystem access:** no
- **Shell / process execution:** no
- **Environment & secrets:** no
- **Dynamic code execution:** no

*"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.*


## Versions

- **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source.

## Links

- Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-anugamchakra-think-like-a-strategy-consultant-profit-leak-diagnoser
- Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/anugamchakra
- Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse

---
Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.