Battlecards

Battlecards

Quick-reference competitive intelligence battlecards for live sales conversations. Designed to be scanned in 30 seconds during a call. Supports batch generation for multiple competitors with confidence-level sourcing on every claim.

The body of this file holds decision-grade context (when to invoke, inputs, structure, anti-hallucination guardrails, gotchas). Step-by-step process, output template, quality gates, and feedback loops live in references/.

Claude Code triggers

Invoke this skill when user says:

• "Create battlecard for [competitor]"
• "Competitive battlecard"
• "How to win against [competitor]"
• "Competitive intel for sales"
• "Battlecards for [product]"
• "Sales battlecard"
• "Counter-positioning against [competitor]"
• "Competitive one-pager" (if focus is on win/lose scenarios)

Do NOT invoke when:

• User wants deep competitor research → Use /competitor-research skill
• User wants sales deck → Use /sales-deck skill
• User wants demo script → Use /demo-script skill
• User wants competitive feature comparison only → Use /competitor-research skill

Input requirements

Required inputs

Optional inputs (improve quality)

Input validation checklist

Before proceeding, verify:

• Competitor(s) confirmed
• Your product's key differentiators known
• At least one intel source available (research, URL, or docs)

If inputs are missing: Ask which competitor(s). Offer to run competitor-research first if no intel available.

Process at a glance

Full step-by-step (with checkpoints, confidence framework, workflow sequences, GDrive export commands) in references/process.md.

Battlecard structure (decision-grade)

Every battlecard contains these sections — in this order, no exceptions:

1. Quick facts — Founded, funding, employees, target market, pricing model, starting price (side-by-side table)
2. When we win — 3 specific scenarios + verbatim customer proof point
3. When we lose — 2+ honest losing scenarios + mitigation actions
4. Their pitch — Verbatim competitor language + key claims
5. Counter-positioning — Scripted "when they say X, we say Y" responses
6. Feature comparison — Honest table with winner-per-row
7. Landmines to plant — 3+ discovery questions that expose competitor weaknesses
8. Objection handling — Common objections with proof-pointed responses
9. Red flags — When to walk away (qualification-out criteria)
10. Sources — Every claim with URL + access date + confidence

Full template with field-level guidance in references/battlecard-template.md. Output wrapper format and iteration prompts in references/auto-update.md.

Anti-hallucination guardrails

Critical for sales credibility:

1. Never invent competitor claims. Only use verified data with sources.
2. Never fabricate customer quotes. Verbatim only or mark "[PLACEHOLDER: need customer quote]".
3. Never guess competitor pricing. Use verified data or mark "[CONFIRM: pricing]".
4. Mark confidence levels on all competitive intel (High/Medium/Low/UNVERIFIED).
5. Cite sources for all factual claims with access dates.
6. Acknowledge gaps rather than fill with plausible content.
7. Be honest about weaknesses. "When we lose" builds credibility with sales team.

Gotchas

• Fabricated competitor pricing: Invents pricing tiers when pricing page is gated or not found → Mark pricing as [UNAVAILABLE] and note where to find it (sales call, demo request). Never guess.
• Generic objection handlers: Produces "we're more reliable" instead of specific counter-arguments → Every objection handler must reference a concrete differentiator or proof point.
• Missing landmines: Only covers strengths, forgets to include questions that expose competitor weaknesses → Landmines are the most valuable section for sales reps. 3-5 questions per competitor minimum.
• Stale competitive data: Uses old competitor positioning without checking current website → Always scrape competitor website at time of battlecard creation. Note access date.

Integration with other skills

Upstream skills (provide inputs)

Downstream skills (consume outputs)

Reference files

MCP data integration

Level: 2 — PM Execution (inherits upstream, no unique pulls)

Inherits from: competitor-research, win-loss-analysis, product-messaging

Pulls fresh: NONE — all data comes from upstream. Battlecards synthesize existing competitor research and win-loss patterns.

Fallback (no MCP): Use competitor-research and win-loss-analysis outputs directly. If upstream skills haven't run, trigger them first before running battlecards.

Changelog