القائمة
Detailed competitive displacement playbooks with talk tracks, proof points, trap questions, and landmine responses
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Fires on any operation that reads or writes deal, company, contact, call note, or task data. Provides: file schemas, write protocol (entity + index + cross-references + ops.log), account name resolution (fuzzy matching), read-time validation, duplicate detection rules. Output contract: every data write follows the standard protocol and produces a FILES UPDATED block.
Fires when a user asks about deal strategy, how to approach a stalled deal, or needs a business case. Produces: Five-Lens Prism analysis (stakeholder psychology, political capital, competitive dynamics, hidden leverage, temporal dynamics), Three Paths recommendation (velocity/diagnostic/protective), 5-Component POV model. Output contract: three distinct strategic options with evidence grading, never a single recommendation.
Fires on meeting prep, outreach, research, deck creation, and business case building. Provides: company overview, product portfolio, market position, differentiators, pricing context, case studies by vertical, key selling metrics, voice & language patterns, pain signal mapping, and prism insights. Output contract: company-specific context that makes outputs relevant to the prospect's actual situation. When a Platform Document exists (from /research), loads enriched voice, pain, and strategic intelligence.
Fires when a competitor is mentioned, a competitive situation arises, or the user asks how to beat/displace/win against a specific vendor. Produces: per-competitor displacement playbook with strengths, weaknesses, talk tracks, proof points, trap questions, and landmine responses. Triggers on: handle-competition, think-about-deal (competitive lens), battle analysis.
Fires on any written output — emails, outreach, LinkedIn posts, business cases, follow-ups. Provides: voice rules, email formatting, vocabulary substitutions, banned phrases, sign-off, and 7-point voice check. Output contract: all written content matches the user's calibrated tone and style.
Fires when a call transcript is pasted or the user says they finished a call. Produces: 6 structured outputs — MEDDPICC scoring with evidence, task extraction with owners and dates, coaching feedback on 5 dimensions, follow-up email in 3 tones, risk signals with mitigation actions, competitive intel. Output contract: every output is actionable, not just analytical.
| name | battlecards |
| description | Detailed competitive displacement playbooks with talk tracks, proof points, trap questions, and landmine responses |
| tier | 3 (regenerated) |
| auto-fire | /battle, /strategy (competitive dynamics lens) |
| user-invocable | false |
Tier 3 — This entire file is regenerated during /setup Phase 3 (Competitive Landscape) with per-competitor displacement playbooks.
Contains detailed competitive battlecards for each of the AE's top competitors. Each battlecard includes: competitor overview, strengths, weaknesses, displacement strategy, talk tracks, proof points, trap questions, and landmine responses. This is the ammunition for competitive selling situations.
Each competitor gets a full battlecard with 8 sections. During /setup Phase 3, SalesSidekick researches each competitor via web search and builds these playbooks.
Populated during /setup via web research — what they're genuinely good at.
When they're strongest: [Specific scenarios where they have a genuine advantage]
Populated during /setup via web research — genuine gaps, not FUD.
When they struggle: [Specific scenarios where they consistently fall short]
How to win when they're the incumbent or primary competitor.
Specific things to say in competitive conversations.
When prospect mentions their strength:
"[Acknowledging response that reframes to our advantage]"
When prospect is comparing features:
"[Response that shifts from features to outcomes — Commandment 9]"
When prospect says they're "good enough":
"[Response that quantifies the gap between 'good enough' and optimal]"
Questions that expose their weaknesses without being aggressive.
When they've set traps — how to respond.
| They Say | You Respond |
|---|---|
| "[Common competitor claim #1]" | "[Evidence-based counter]" |
| "[Common competitor claim #2]" | "[Evidence-based counter]" |
| "[Common competitor claim #3]" | "[Evidence-based counter]" |
Same 8-section structure. Populated during /setup Phase 3.
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
Same 8-section structure. Populated during /setup Phase 3.
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
[Populated during /setup]
When assessing competitive win probability:
| Signal | Impact on Win Probability |
|---|---|
| Champion actively advocating for us | +0.2 |
| Champion aligned with competitor | -0.2 |
| Economic buyer met and positive | +0.15 |
| Incumbent advantage (they're already in) | -0.15 |
| We've redefined the evaluation criteria | +0.15 |
| They're ahead in the evaluation timeline | -0.1 |
| Customer has switched from them before | +0.1 |
| Decision criteria favor our strengths | +0.1 |
Starting base: 0.5 (coin flip). Adjust up/down based on signals.
