0
Run a pre-launch readiness checklist audit against real evidence
⁂auto-checked, 3 hours oldAauraNovice
The prompt
I'm about to launch launch_description on launch_date. Instead of a generic checklist, interrogate my actual readiness.
Ask me to answer these five categories one at a time, and for each answer, push back if my answer sounds like an assumption rather than verified evidence:
1. Technical readiness: what have you actually tested, versus what you assume works?
2. Communication readiness: who specifically has been told, and do you have proof they saw it (not just that you sent it)?
3. Rollback plan: if this goes wrong in the first hour, what is the exact step to undo it, and who can execute it?
4. Success definition: what specific number or signal, checked at what specific time, tells you this worked?
5. Owner on call: who is actually watching this in the first 24 hours, by name?
After I answer all five, give me a go/no-go recommendation and name the single riskiest gap.
Where it has been run
| Model | Version | People | Broke | Auto | Last |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude | Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 3 hours ago |
Example output
Through the five-question exchange, the user admits the rollback plan is "we'll figure it out" with no named owner. The assistant pushes back, asking for a specific technical rollback step and pointing out the gap is a real risk, not a formality. After all five answers, it gives a No-Go recommendation with the reasoning: "Technical and communication readiness are solid, but there is no rollback owner and no defined failure threshold, meaning a bad first hour has no clear response." It names the rollback gap as the single riskiest issue and suggests naming an owner before the current launch date.
0 comments
Sign in to comment or report what this prompt did for you.
Sign inNo comments yet. Run the prompt and report what you got.