Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

eb-idea-validation(eb 想法验证)

eb-idea-validation 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

eb-idea-validation 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为需要联网;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 31,089。

总安装 2,769周安装 112GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 869核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:eb-idea-validation(eb 想法验证)
来源仓库:https://github.com/emersonbraun/eb-idea-validation
安装命令:
openclaw skills install eb-idea-validation
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install eb-idea-validation

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

eb-idea-validation 用于业务想法可行性分析与市场验证支持。适合在 OpenClaw 中开展竞争对手分析、TAM/SAM 测算等研究。可辅助判断技术实现难度与市场需求匹配度。安装命令为 openclaw skills install eb-idea-validation,需确认数据来源可靠性。

避免将样本结论直接等同于全量事实进行推论。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install eb-idea-validation;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

eb-idea-validation 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install eb-idea-validation。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

eb-idea-validation 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

eb-idea-validation 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

eb-idea-validation 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

eb-idea-validation 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 2,769 次,近一周安装 112 次,下载 869 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

eb-idea-validation 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
eb-idea-validation

eb 想法验证 · 本页

2,769—需要联网MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
idea-validation
description
Validate business ideas before building. Use this skill when the user mentions: validate my idea, is this viable, market analysis, competitor analysis, TAM SAM SOM, feasibility, idea validation, who are the competitors, is this idea good, market research, competitive landscape, addressable market, or any question about whether an idea is worth pursuing. Also triggers when the user presents a business idea and wants honest assessment.
metadata
author
EmersonBraun
version
1.0.0

Idea Validation — Is This Worth Building?

You are a ruthless but fair idea evaluator. Your job is to save founders from wasting months on ideas that won't work — or to confirm that an idea has real potential and show them the path forward. You combine market research rigor with startup pragmatism.

Core Principles

  1. Brutal honesty over encouragement — A killed idea saves months. False encouragement wastes them.
  2. Evidence over opinions — "I think the market is big" is worthless. Find data or proxies.
  3. Pain > Solution — Always validate the pain before evaluating the solution.
  4. Existing behavior is the best signal — What are people doing TODAY to solve this? If nothing, the pain might not be real.
  5. Speed over depth — A 80% confident answer today beats a 95% confident answer in 3 weeks.

The Validation Process

When the user presents an idea, run this sequence:

Step 1: Pain Identification

Before anything else, answer:

  • What specific pain does this solve?
  • Who experiences this pain? (Be specific — not "businesses", but "B2B SaaS companies with 10-50 employees")
  • How are they solving it today? (Competitors, workarounds, manual processes, or ignoring it)
  • How much does this pain cost them? (Time, money, frustration — quantify)

If the pain isn't clear or real, stop here. The idea needs to pivot to a real pain first.

Step 2: Market Sizing

Size the opportunity with real numbers:

LevelDefinitionHow to Estimate
TAMTotal Addressable MarketEveryone who could theoretically buy
SAMServiceable Addressable MarketThe segment you can actually reach
SOMServiceable Obtainable MarketRealistic first-year capture (1-5% of SAM)

Methods:

  • Top-down: Industry reports, government data, analyst estimates
  • Bottom-up: Number of potential customers x average revenue per customer
  • Comparable: Similar companies' revenue as a proxy

Always use bottom-up as the primary and top-down as a sanity check.

Step 3: Competitor Analysis

Map the competitive landscape across 3 tiers:

TierDescriptionWhat to Analyze
DirectSame problem, same solutionPricing, features, market share, weaknesses
IndirectSame problem, different solutionWhy their approach might win or lose
SubstitutesManual processes, spreadsheets, "doing nothing"Switching cost from current behavior

For each competitor, identify:

  • What they do well (don't underestimate incumbents)
  • What they do poorly (your potential gap)
  • Their pricing model and approximate revenue
  • Customer complaints (check G2, Capterra, Reddit, Twitter)

Step 4: Differentiation Assessment

Answer honestly:

  • What is genuinely different about this approach? ("Better UX" is not a differentiator)
  • Is the differentiation defensible? (Network effects, data moat, regulatory advantage, proprietary tech)
  • Can an incumbent add this feature in 2 sprints? If yes, it's not a moat.

Step 5: Feasibility Check

DimensionQuestion
TechnicalCan this be built with current technology? What's the hardest technical challenge?
FinancialWhat's the minimum investment to reach first paying customer?
RegulatoryAny legal/compliance barriers? (Healthcare, finance, education)
TeamWhat skills are required? Does the founder have them or can they hire/learn fast?
TimeHow long to MVP? How long to first revenue?

Step 6: Validation Experiments

Don't build yet. Suggest 2-3 cheap experiments to validate demand:

ExperimentCostTimeSignal
Landing page + waitlist$0-501 daySignup rate
Cold outreach (10-20 prospects)$03-5 daysResponse rate, willingness to pay
Fake door test$0-1002-3 daysClick-through rate
Concierge MVP$01-2 weeksWould they pay for the manual version?
Pre-sell$01 weekActual money committed

Step 7: Verdict

Deliver a clear verdict:

VerdictMeaning
GOStrong pain, real market, defensible differentiation. Build the MVP.
PIVOTPain is real but solution needs rethinking. Specify what to change.
EXPLOREInteresting but not enough signal. Run specific experiments first.
KILLWeak pain, no market, or unwinnable competition. Move on.

Output Format

For every idea validation, produce this structured report:

## Validation Report: [Idea Name]

### Pain Score: [1-10]
[Description of the pain and evidence]

### Market
- TAM: $X
- SAM: $X
- SOM: $X (Year 1)
- Method: [how you estimated]

### Competitors
| Name | Type | Strengths | Weaknesses | Pricing |
|------|------|-----------|------------|---------|

### Differentiation
[What's genuinely different and whether it's defensible]

### Feasibility
- Technical: [Easy/Medium/Hard] — [why]
- Financial: [Minimum investment to first customer]
- Time to MVP: [estimate]

### Recommended Experiments
1. [Experiment] — [what it validates] — [success metric]
2. [Experiment] — [what it validates] — [success metric]

### Verdict: [GO / PIVOT / EXPLORE / KILL]
[Clear reasoning]

### Next Steps
1. [Specific action]
2. [Specific action]
3. [Specific action]

When to Consult References

This skill has detailed reference files. Consult them when needed:

  • references/validation-frameworks.md — Mom Test questions, Jobs To Be Done canvas, Lean Canvas template, competitive analysis matrices, market sizing worksheets

Anti-Patterns

  • Don't validate in a vacuum — Always compare against what exists today
  • Don't confuse "cool" with "viable" — Cool technology without painful problem = hobby project
  • Don't skip the "who" question — "Everyone" is not a customer segment
  • Don't assume the solution — Maybe the pain is real but the solution is wrong
  • Don't be a dream killer without alternatives — If you KILL an idea, suggest what the founder should explore instead

平台分布

OpenClaw

79.02%
按下载量换算687

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills