sales-competitors

name	sales-competitors
description	Competitive Intelligence Engine Subagent — detects what tools/solutions a prospect currently uses via 6 detection methods, builds 10-section battle cards per overlapping competitor, and assembles a scored competitive strategy. Trigger standalone via `/sales competitors <url>` producing COMPETITIVE-INTEL.md, or as subagent during `/sales prospect <url>` returning Competitive Position Score 0-100. Industry-agnostic engine.
weight	0.15
tier	spoke

Competitive Intelligence Engine

Tier 0 Doctrine

• Tier: Spoke (subagent of sales-prospect orchestrator; also standalone via /sales competitors <url>)
• Authority: Reads prospect URL from orchestrator or user; detects current solutions and builds competitive battle cards only
• Determinism first: All detection uses 6 declared methods. All scoring uses declared formulas and confidence levels. No LLM interpretation of scores.
• No fabrication: Every competitor capability must have a source. Unverified claims are labeled "Reported." Absence of data is noted, not invented.

---

IMO (Top-Level)

Layer	Responsibility
Ingress	Company URL + optional prior analysis files (PROSPECT-ANALYSIS.md, COMPANY-RESEARCH.md, LEAD-QUALIFICATION.md) — schema validation only
Middle	6-method solution detection; 10-section battle card generation per competitor; feature gap analysis; win/loss pattern recognition; competitive strategy assembly; 0-100 scoring
Egress	COMPETITIVE-INTEL.md (standalone) or Competitive Position Score 0-100 with structured data (subagent) — read-only output

---

Constants

Constant	Value	Authority
Detection Methods	6 fixed: Website Technology Analysis, Job Posting Analysis, Case Study/Partnership Search, Review Site Search, Tech Stack Detection Services, Social Signal Analysis	Locked
Confidence Levels	High (explicit mention/badge), Medium (script tag/indirect reference), Low (inference from job posting/industry norm)	Fixed; 3 levels
Battle Card Sections	10 fixed: What They Use It For, Strengths (3-5), Weaknesses (3-5), Your Advantages + proof, Their Advantages + Neutralization, Switching Cost Assessment (5 factors), Switching Triggers (5), Landmine Questions (5), Trap to Avoid, Positioning Statement	Locked
Switching Cost Factors	5 fixed: Technical migration, Financial cost, Organizational change, Data portability, Timeline estimate	Fixed
Feature Comparison Rules	Include wins AND losses; specific details not checkmarks; mark unverified as "Reported"; organize by prospect importance	Fixed
Win/Loss Pattern Format	3-5 win reasons + 3-5 loss reasons per competitor	Fixed
Deal Qualification Signal Format	"If prospect says X -> favors you/competitor"	Fixed
Competitive Strategy Structure	Strategy Summary, Conversation Sequence (5 topics), What to Lead With, What to Avoid, Displacement Timeline	Fixed; 5 sections
Scoring Sub-Dimensions	Detection Breadth, Battle Card Depth, Strategy Coherence, Evidence Quality, Displacement Feasibility	Fixed; 5 sub-dimensions
Sub-Dimension Range	0-20 each	Fixed
Score Formula	sum of 5 sub-dimensions	Produces 0-100
Output: Standalone	COMPETITIVE-INTEL.md	Fixed
Output: Subagent	Competitive Position Score 0-100 + structured data block	Fixed
Output Sections	Executive Summary, Current Solutions Detected, Battle Cards, Feature Gap Analysis, Win/Loss Patterns, Competitive Positioning Statements, Switching Cost Assessment, Recommended Strategy, Detection Sources	Fixed; 9 sections
Refresh Recommendation	Every 3-6 months or before major competitive deal	Fixed

---

Variables

Variable	Source	Runtime
target_url	User input or orchestrator briefing	Per-run
company_name	Homepage detection	Discovered
invocation_mode	standalone or subagent	Per-run
prior_analysis	PROSPECT-ANALYSIS.md, COMPANY-RESEARCH.md, LEAD-QUALIFICATION.md (if present)	Per-run
detected_solutions	6 detection methods	Discovered
confidence_ratings	Per solution — High/Medium/Low	Computed
solution_categories	CRM, Marketing Automation, Analytics, Customer Support, Project Management, Communication, etc.	Discovered
overlapping_competitors	Subset of detected solutions that compete with offering	Computed
battle_cards	10-section card per overlapping competitor	Computed
feature_comparison	Side-by-side table across competitors	Computed
win_loss_patterns	3-5 win reasons + 3-5 loss reasons per competitor	Computed
deal_qualification_signals	Computed from win/loss patterns	Computed
competitive_strategy	Strategy Summary + Conversation Sequence + Lead/Avoid + Displacement Timeline	Computed
detection_breadth_score	Sub-dimension 0-20	Computed
battle_card_depth_score	Sub-dimension 0-20	Computed
strategy_coherence_score	Sub-dimension 0-20	Computed
evidence_quality_score	Sub-dimension 0-20	Computed

---

Workflow

BLOCK 1: Solution Detection

Governed by: C&V

Constants: 6 detection methods, 3 confidence levels, source priority Variables: target_url, company_name, detected_solutions, confidence_ratings, prior_analysis

IMO:

• Ingress: URL validated as reachable; prior analysis files loaded if present in working directory
• Middle:
  • Execute all 6 detection methods in parallel via WebFetch and WebSearch:
    • Website Technology Analysis: Fetch prospect URL. Inspect HTML source for script tags, meta tags, link tags referencing known tools. Check homepage, footer, integrations page, partners page for tool logos/badges. Detect "Powered by" footers. Identify website platform, hosting, CDN, email provider. Check login/portal links and API documentation pages.
    • Job Posting Analysis: WebSearch "[Company Name]" careers, "[Company Name]" open jobs, "[Company Name]" hiring. Extract tool-specific requirements, tech stack mentions, vendor certifications, process tool references. These are HIGH confidence signals.
    • Case Study/Partnership Search: WebSearch "[Company Name]" case study [competitor], "[Company Name]" customer story, "[Company Name]" testimonial. Check if prospect appears on competitor websites as customer, in testimonials, as partner.
    • Review Site Search: WebSearch site:g2.com "[Company Name]", site:capterra.com "[Company Name]", "[Company Name]" review [tool category]. Note which products reviewed, satisfaction level, specific complaints/praise, review date.
    • Tech Stack Detection Services: WebSearch site:builtwith.com [Company Domain], site:stackshare.io "[Company Name]", "[Company Domain]" technology stack. Catalog technologies not visible through direct inspection.
    • Social Signal Analysis: WebSearch "[Company Name]" [tool category] site:linkedin.com, "[Company Name]" "we use" OR "switched to" OR "implemented". Look for blog posts, LinkedIn posts, conference talks, community forum posts about tool choices.
  • For each detected technology, record: tool/platform name, evidence source (URL/page element/signal), confidence level (High/Medium/Low)
  • If prior analysis files exist, incorporate prospect priorities and pain points into detection weighting
  • If URL unreachable: attempt www/non-www and https/http variants; if still unreachable, halt
• Egress: Structured detection inventory: tool name + evidence + confidence per entry

Go/No-Go: Proceed if at least 1 solution detected. If zero solutions detected across all 6 methods, halt and report to user.

---

BLOCK 2: Battle Card Generation

Governed by: IMO

Constants: 10 battle card sections, switching cost factors (5), feature comparison rules Variables: overlapping_competitors, battle_cards, feature_comparison, solution_categories

IMO:

• Ingress: Full detection inventory from Block 1
• Middle:
  • Categorize all detected solutions into relevant categories (CRM, Marketing Automation, Analytics, Customer Support, Project Management, Communication, etc.)
  • Identify which detected solutions overlap with or compete against offering — these receive full battle cards
  • For EACH overlapping competitor, build 10-section battle card:
    1. What They Use It For — specific description based on detection evidence
    2. Strengths (3-5) — genuine strengths with why each matters to prospect. Credibility requires honesty.
    3. Weaknesses (3-5) — specific weaknesses with evidence. "Bad support" is too generic; "48-hour average ticket response, no dedicated AM under $50K ARR" is specific.
    4. Your Advantages — each with proof point (metric, case study, testimonial)
    5. Their Advantages + Neutralization — honest about where competitor wins; for each, explain how to neutralize or reframe
    6. Switching Cost Assessment — 5 factors table: Technical migration (Low/Med/High + details), Financial cost (Low/Med/High + details), Organizational change (Low/Med/High + details), Data portability (Easy/Moderate/Difficult + details), Timeline estimate (weeks/months + details)
    7. Switching Triggers (5) — events that commonly cause customers to switch (contract renewal price increase, outgrowing tier structure, feature gap blocking workflow, new leadership vendor consolidation, poor support during critical incident)
    8. Landmine Questions (5) — questions exposing competitor weaknesses without bashing. Must be genuinely curious questions any smart buyer would ask.
    9. Trap to Avoid — what NOT to say about this competitor and why
    10. Positioning Statement — one sentence: "While [Competitor] is [honest strength], [Your Company] [differentiator] which means [specific outcome for prospect]."
  • Build feature comparison table: side-by-side across competitors. Include features where you win AND lose. Use specific details not checkmarks. Mark unverified as "Reported." Organize by prospect importance.
• Egress: Structured battle cards + feature comparison table per competitor

Go/No-Go: Proceed if at least 1 battle card produced. If no overlapping competitors found, produce detection report only (no battle cards needed).

---

BLOCK 3: Win/Loss Analysis & Strategy

Governed by: Circle

Constants: Win/loss pattern format (3-5 each), deal qualification signal format, competitive strategy structure (5 sections) Variables: win_loss_patterns, deal_qualification_signals, competitive_strategy

IMO:

• Ingress: All battle cards + feature comparison from Block 2 + prior analysis context
• Middle:
  • For each competitor, compile win/loss patterns:
    • Win Patterns (3-5): "We win when [specific situation or buyer profile]" — derived from battle card analysis, switching triggers, and feature advantages
    • Loss Patterns (3-5): "We lose when [specific situation or buyer profile]" — derived from competitor strengths and their advantages
  • Generate deal qualification signals from win/loss patterns: "If prospect says [X] -> favors you because [reason]", "If prospect prioritizes [Z] -> strong deal for you", "If prospect prioritizes [W] -> consider deprioritizing"
  • Assemble competitive strategy:
    • Strategy Summary: One paragraph — which competitor to focus on displacing, which to ignore, what messaging to lead with
    • Conversation Sequence: 5 topics in recommended order, each with reasoning
    • What to Lead With: Single strongest differentiator with talking point script
    • What to Avoid: Topics, claims, comparisons to deliberately avoid with reasons
    • Displacement Timeline: When to start (relative to contract renewal), expected evaluation period, migration timeline, full transition period
  • Validate: every claim traceable to detection evidence or battle card analysis. No unsourced assertions.
• Egress: Validated win/loss patterns + deal qualification signals + competitive strategy

Go/No-Go: Proceed unconditionally. If limited data, reduce strategy confidence and note gaps.

---

BLOCK 4: Scoring & Output Assembly

Governed by: CTB

Constants: 5 scoring sub-dimensions, sub-dimension range 0-20, score formula, output sections (9), refresh recommendation Variables: All 5 sub-dimension scores, competitive_position_score, invocation_mode

IMO:

• Ingress: All data from Blocks 1-3: detection inventory, battle cards, feature comparison, win/loss patterns, competitive strategy
• Middle:
  • Score 5 sub-dimensions (0-20 each):
    • Detection Breadth (0-20): How many methods yielded results; how many solutions detected; confidence distribution. 6/6 methods with High confidence = 18-20; 1-2 methods with Low confidence = 2-6.
    • Battle Card Depth (0-20): Completeness of 10 sections per card; specificity of evidence; actionability of talking points. All 10 sections with specific evidence = 16-20; sparse or generic = 4-8.
    • Strategy Coherence (0-20): Logical consistency between detection, battle cards, and strategy; clear prioritization; actionable conversation sequence. Fully coherent = 16-20; contradictory or vague = 4-8.
    • Evidence Quality (0-20): Proportion of High confidence detections; source diversity; recency of sources. Mostly High + multiple sources = 16-20; mostly Low + single source = 2-6.
    • Displacement Feasibility (0-20): Realistic switching costs; identified triggers aligned with prospect context; viable timeline. Clear path with triggers = 16-20; high switching cost + no triggers = 2-6.
  • Compute competitive_position_score = sum of 5 sub-dimensions
  • If invocation_mode = standalone: assemble full COMPETITIVE-INTEL.md with all 9 output sections (Executive Summary, Current Solutions Detected, Battle Cards, Feature Gap Analysis, Win/Loss Patterns, Competitive Positioning Statements, Switching Cost Assessment, Recommended Strategy, Detection Sources)
  • If invocation_mode = subagent: return structured data block with Competitive Position Score, sub-dimension breakdown, top competitors, key strategy points
  • Append refresh recommendation: "Refresh every 3-6 months or before major competitive deal"
  • Note detection source dates throughout
• Egress: COMPETITIVE-INTEL.md written to disk (standalone) or structured score block returned (subagent)

Go/No-Go: Output is always produced. Clearly note all data gaps and confidence limitations.

---

Rules

1. Never fabricate competitor capabilities. If a feature, price, or capability cannot be verified, label it as "Reported" or "Unverified." Sales credibility depends on accuracy.
2. Never omit competitor strengths from a battle card. Every battle card must include genuine strengths. One-sided portrayals destroy credibility the moment the prospect pushes back.
3. Never recommend bashing competitors. Battle cards position and differentiate. Negative selling backfires.
4. Never use generic assessments. "Better support" is useless. "Dedicated AM for all plans, 2-hour avg response vs their 24-hour SLA" is actionable. Specific over generic always.
5. Never skip confidence labeling on detected technologies. High/Medium/Low must accompany every detection. A badge on the website carries different weight than an industry-norm inference.
6. Never underestimate or overestimate switching costs. Underestimating looks naive. Overestimating makes the deal feel impossible. Accuracy matters.
7. Never ignore prior analysis files when present. If PROSPECT-ANALYSIS.md, COMPANY-RESEARCH.md, or LEAD-QUALIFICATION.md exist, incorporate their findings into competitive positioning.
8. Never write transparent trap questions. Landmine questions must be genuinely curious questions any smart buyer would ask, not obvious traps designed to embarrass the competitor.
9. Never omit refresh recommendation date. Competitive intelligence has a shelf life. Note source dates and recommend refresh timeline.
10. Never present one-sided feature comparisons. Include features where you win AND where you lose. Credibility requires showing both.

---

Reference Pointers

Reference	Location
Orchestrator	skills/sales-prospect/SKILL.md
Company research skill	skills/sales-research/SKILL.md
Qualification skill	skills/sales-qualify/SKILL.md
Contacts skill	skills/sales-contacts/SKILL.md
Prior analysis files	PROSPECT-ANALYSIS.md, COMPANY-RESEARCH.md, LEAD-QUALIFICATION.md (working directory, optional)
Doctrine	templates/doctrine/ARCHITECTURE.md (IMO, Hub-Spoke, CTB)
Skill creation rules	skills/skill-creator/SKILL.md