competitive-battlecard-generator

Competitive Battlecard Generator

Generate comprehensive, actionable competitive battlecards using WebSearch. Each battlecard gives sales teams the intelligence they need to win competitive deals — competitor strengths, weaknesses, objection handling, and trap questions, all grounded in real research. Can batch-process up to 5 competitors in a single run.

Activation

When the user triggers this skill, follow the steps below in order. Do NOT skip the input step. Do NOT produce a battlecard without gathering context first.

Step 1 — Collect Input

Ask the user for these inputs all at once in a numbered list:

I need some context before building your battlecard(s). Answer these questions:

1. What is your company name and what do you do? (one sentence)
2. Which competitor(s) do you want a battlecard for? (1-5 names)
3. (Optional) What are your key differentiators? (3-5 bullets)
4. (Optional) Any known weaknesses of the competitor(s)?
5. (Optional) Are you usually compared to them? In what context?

Rules for this step:

• Wait for the user to respond before proceeding. Do NOT generate placeholder answers.
• Only question 1 and 2 are required. If either is missing, ask again.
• If the user provides more than 5 competitors, tell them you will batch the first 5 and they can run the skill again for the rest.
• If the user provides optional inputs, use them to sharpen the analysis. If they skip optionals, proceed without them — you will research independently.

Step 2 — Competitor Overview

For each competitor, run 2-3 WebSearch queries to establish a factual baseline.

Search patterns:

• "{competitor} what does it do" or "{competitor} company overview"
• "{competitor} funding crunchbase" or "{competitor} series funding investors"
• "{competitor} customers case studies" or "{competitor} pricing"

Gather these data points:

| Field | Description | |---|---| | What they do | Their positioning statement — how they describe themselves (from their homepage or about page) | | Founded | Year founded | | HQ | Headquarters location | | Company size | Employee count range | | Funding | Total raised, last round, key investors (for private companies) | | Key customers | Named logos from case studies, website, or press releases (3-8 names) | | Target market | Who they sell to — company size, industry, buyer persona | | Pricing model | Pricing tiers, per-seat, usage-based, etc. If not publicly available, write "Pricing not publicly available — ask during discovery" | | Recent news | 1-3 headlines from the last 90 days with source URLs |

Rules:

• If any data point is not findable after searching, write "Not found." Never fabricate company data.
• Always include the source URL for each data point in the Sources section.

Step 3 — Their Pitch

For each competitor, run 1-2 WebSearch queries to document their messaging.

Search patterns:

• "{competitor}" (homepage messaging)
• "{competitor} why choose us" or "{competitor} vs alternatives"

Gather:

| Field | Description | |---|---| | Main value proposition | Their primary claim — the one sentence from their homepage or hero section | | Top 3-5 claims | The specific promises they make (speed, accuracy, cost savings, ease of use, etc.) | | How they differentiate | What they say makes them different from competitors | | Key messaging themes | Recurring themes across their marketing (innovation, simplicity, enterprise-grade, etc.) | | Awards or recognition | Analyst reports (Gartner, Forrester), G2 badges, industry awards they highlight |

Step 4 — Strengths Analysis

Honestly assess what the competitor does well. A battlecard that ignores competitor advantages is useless — sales reps will lose credibility if they dismiss a competitor that the prospect already likes.

For each competitor, run 1-2 WebSearch queries.

Search patterns:

• "{competitor} reviews G2" or "why I chose {competitor}"
• "{competitor} case study results"

Document:

| Field | Description | |---|---| | What they do well | Objective strengths — features, UX, integrations, market position | | Where they have an advantage over you | Be honest. If they are better at something, say so. This helps reps prepare instead of getting blindsided. | | What their customers love | Pull from reviews, testimonials, and case studies | | Why companies choose them | The top 2-3 reasons buyers pick them over alternatives |

Step 5 — Weaknesses Analysis

Use WebSearch aggressively to find real complaints, criticisms, and gaps. This is the highest-value section of the battlecard.

Run 3-4 WebSearch queries per competitor:

Search patterns:

• "{competitor} reviews complaints" or "{competitor} negative reviews G2 Capterra"
• "{competitor} reddit problems" or "{competitor} reddit complaints"
• "{competitor} issues limitations" or "switching from {competitor}"
• "{competitor} vs" (often surfaces comparison articles that highlight weaknesses)

Organize weaknesses into categories:

| Category | What to look for | |---|---| | Feature gaps | Missing capabilities that buyers frequently ask about | | Pricing complaints | Too expensive, hidden fees, forced annual contracts, price increases | | Support/service issues | Slow support, poor onboarding, unresponsive account management | | Implementation difficulties | Long setup times, complex configuration, migration pain | | Product quality | Bugs, downtime, performance issues, outdated UI | | Customer churn signals | People posting about leaving, "alternatives to {competitor}" searches | | Scalability concerns | Breaks at volume, enterprise readiness gaps |

Rules:

• Every weakness claim must have a source (URL, review platform, Reddit thread). Never invent criticisms.
• Distinguish between isolated complaints and patterns. A single bad review is an anecdote; five reviews mentioning the same issue is a pattern.

Step 6 — Win/Loss Patterns

Based on all research gathered so far, synthesize win/loss patterns. If the user provided optional inputs in Step 1 (known weaknesses, comparison context), factor those in.

Run 1-2 additional WebSearch queries if needed:

Search patterns:

• "{competitor} vs {your company}" or "why I switched from {competitor}"
• "{competitor} alternative for {use case}"

Document four categories:

| Category | Description | |---|---| | When you WIN against them | Conditions, buyer profiles, and use cases where you have the advantage. Be specific: company size, industry, technical requirements, decision-maker priorities. | | When you LOSE to them | Conditions where they are stronger. Sales reps need to know when they are walking into a tough fight. | | Deal killers | Specific things that make the competitor unbeatable for certain buyers (e.g., "If the buyer needs X integration, they will choose {competitor} every time — we do not support it yet") | | Landmine questions | 3-5 questions that expose the competitor's weaknesses without being negative. These are questions the sales rep can suggest the prospect ask the competitor during their evaluation. |

Step 7 — Objection Handling

For each competitor, create 5-8 objection handling entries. These should cover the most common things a prospect says when they are leaning toward the competitor.

Format for each entry:

| They Say | The Truth | We Say | |----------|-----------|--------| | {What the prospect or competitor claims} | {The reality behind the claim — factual, sourced where possible} | {Your counter-positioning — conversational tone, not corporate speak} |

Rules:

• "They Say" should be phrased as the prospect would say it, not as a formal objection label. Example: "But {competitor} has better integrations" — not "Integration breadth objection."
• "The Truth" must be factua