/cs:cdo-review — CDO Forcing Questions

/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.

How to use it

Claude Code
  1. Run the line below. It pulls the whole folder into ~/.claude/skills/cdo-review, including the files SKILL.md points to.
  2. Describe your job in plain words. Claude Code follows the skill from there.
Claude Code — installs the whole folder, not just SKILL.md
npx degit alirezarezvani/claude-skills/c-level-agents/skills/cdo-review#main ~/.claude/skills/cdo-review

For one project only, change the path to .claude/skills/cdo-review. This skill also uses ai_training_data_audit.py, data_asset_valuator.py, sources.json, profile.json, corpus.json — copying SKILL.md alone won't be enough. See the folder on GitHub.

Claude (web or desktop app)
  1. On this page open ⋯ → Download .md.
  2. Save it as SKILL.md in a folder, zip the folder, then Customize → Skills → + → Create skill → Upload a skill.
  3. Pick the file and Save. Claude shows the name and description and runs a security scan.
  4. Check the skill is switched on.
  5. Start a new chat and describe your job in plain words. The AI follows the skill from there.
ChatGPT or another app
  1. ChatGPT: make a Project and paste it into Instructions.
  2. Neither? Paste it at the top of a new chat — it works for that chat.
Not working?
  • Check which app you pasted it into — the steps above name the right one.
  • Some skills need the paid tier of Claude or ChatGPT.
Step-by-step guide with screenshots · Ask in the forum

Paste into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor.

Source of /cs:cdo-review — CDO Forcing Questions

Show the full text127 lines
namedescription
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. Use when validating training-data rights before model work, choosing warehouse vs lakehouse vs mesh, or valuing data assets for productization or M&A.

/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.

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

# 1. AI training audit (if any ML / AI use case)
python ../../../c-level-advisor/skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/ai_training_data_audit.py sources.json

# 2. Architecture decision (if changing the stack)
python ../../../c-level-advisor/skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/data_product_strategy_picker.py profile.json

# 3. Data asset valuation (if productizing or pre-M&A)
python ../../../c-level-advisor/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-advisor agent — for data team hires (comp, ladder, leveling)
  • /cs:decide — log the verdict
  • /cs:freeze 90 — on multi-year infrastructure contracts
  • Agent: cs-cdo-advisor
  • Skill: chief-data-officer-advisor
  • Adjacent: ../../../c-level-advisor/skills/general-counsel-advisor/ (contractual constraints), ../../../c-level-advisor/skills/cto-advisor/ (architecture capacity)

Version: 1.0.0

1---
2name: "cdo-review"
3description: "/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. Use when validating training-data rights before model work, choosing warehouse vs lakehouse vs mesh, or valuing data assets for productization or M&A."
4---
5 
6# /cs:cdo-review — CDO Forcing Questions
7 
8**Command:** `/cs:cdo-review <plan>`
9 
10The 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.
11 
12## When to Run
13 
14- Before approving any new ML model training run that uses customer data
15- Before signing a multi-year data-infrastructure SaaS contract (Snowflake, Databricks, Fivetran)
16- Before productizing any customer data (benchmark report, embedding endpoint, license)
17- Before a major data team hire (head of data, CDO, data PM, ML engineer)
18- Before M&A diligence — yours or theirs
19- When the founder uses the word "monetize" near "data"
20 
21## The Six CDO Questions
22 
23### 1. What decision does this data drive?
24**If no decision is unblocked, why are we collecting / training on / productizing it?**
25- "We might need it later" is not a decision.
26- "It feels like a moat" is not a decision.
27- A real answer names a specific business call that requires this data.
28 
29### 2. What's the consent provenance for every source?
30**For each data source: origin, consent flow, data class, intended use.**
31- 1st-party-TOS-only is weaker than 1st-party-explicit-opt-in.
32- Bundled TOS doesn't cover material new purposes (training on PII for foundation models).
33- Run `ai_training_data_audit.py` if there's any AI use case in scope.
34 
35### 3. Who consumes this internally — and how many distinct functional domains?
36**Drives the centralize-vs-embed and warehouse-vs-mesh decisions.**
37- <5 consumers: warehouse-only.
38- 5-25 consumers: lakehouse.
39- 25+ consumers + federated culture: mesh.
40- Premature architecture choice is the #1 cause of data-team burnout.
41 
42### 4. What's the M&A diligence impact?
43**If an acquirer asks about this data corpus tomorrow, are we ready?**
44- Is there a documented anonymization process?
45- What % of customers have MSA carve-outs?
46- Are training-data provenance logs current?
47- Run `data_asset_valuator.py` quarterly.
48 
49### 5. Can the model / decision / report be retrained / re-run / re-published without this source?
50**Tests how much you depend on a specific data source.**
51- If yes → low blast radius; you can change consent posture later.
52- If no → high blast radius; you've structurally committed to the source. Vet harder.
53 
54### 6. What role unblocks this — and is it the right next hire?
55**Wrong hire (data scientist) when right answer (analytics engineer) is a 12-month productivity loss.**
56- Map the decision being unblocked to the specific role.
57- Confirm prerequisite roles are in place (data engineer before ML engineer, analyst before data scientist).
58 
59## Workflow
60 
61```bash
62# 1. AI training audit (if any ML / AI use case)
63python ../../../c-level-advisor/skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/ai_training_data_audit.py sources.json
64 
65# 2. Architecture decision (if changing the stack)
66python ../../../c-level-advisor/skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/data_product_strategy_picker.py profile.json
67 
68# 3. Data asset valuation (if productizing or pre-M&A)
69python ../../../c-level-advisor/skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/scripts/data_asset_valuator.py corpus.json
70```
71 
72## Output Format
73 
74```markdown
75# CDO Review: <plan>
76**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
77 
78## The Decision Being Made
79[one sentence — which of the four CDO decisions: training | architecture | asset | hire]
80 
81## Training Audit (if applicable)
82- NO-GO sources: N
83- MITIGATE sources: N
84- GO sources: N
85- Top remediation: <one line>
86 
87## Architecture (if applicable)
88- Recommended: WAREHOUSE / LAKEHOUSE / MESH
89- Build-vs-buy summary: <one line>
90- Kill criteria: <when to revisit>
91 
92## Asset Value (if applicable)
93- Strategic value: X/10 | Moat: STRONG / MEDIUM / WEAK
94- M&A multiplier: X.Xx – X.Xx ARR
95- Recommended productization path: <name>
96 
97## Org (if applicable)
98- Next hire: <role>
99- Why this, not that: <one line>
100- Prerequisite hires in place: yes/no
101 
102## Verdict
103🟢 SHIP | 🟡 SHARPEN | 🔴 BLOCK
104 
105## Next Steps
106[3 concrete actions]
107```
108 
109## Routing
110 
111- `/cs:gc-review` — for any productization or licensing path
112- `/cs:ciso-review` — for any architecture change touching customer data
113- `/cs:cfo-review` — for build-vs-buy TCO and M&A valuation math
114- `cs-chro-advisor` agent — for data team hires (comp, ladder, leveling)
115- `/cs:decide` — log the verdict
116- `/cs:freeze 90` — on multi-year infrastructure contracts
117 
118## Related
119 
120- Agent: [`cs-cdo-advisor`](../../agents/cs-cdo-advisor.md)
121- Skill: [`chief-data-officer-advisor`](../../../c-level-advisor/skills/chief-data-officer-advisor/SKILL.md)
122- Adjacent: `../../../c-level-advisor/skills/general-counsel-advisor/` (contractual constraints), `../../../c-level-advisor/skills/cto-advisor/` (architecture capacity)
123 
124---
125 
126**Version:** 1.0.0
127 

Discussion

Alternatives

Also in Decision checksSee all 277 in Product →