Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

battlecard-generator战卡生成器

Agent Skill

battlecard-generator 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

1,529

周安装

65

GitHub Stars

1

下载量

536
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:battlecard-generator(战卡生成器)
来源仓库:https://github.com/nikiandr/goose-skills
仓库路径:skills/battlecard-generator
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/nikiandr/goose-skills --skill battlecard-generator
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/nikiandr/goose-skills --skill battlecard-generator

简介

battlecard-generator 用于研究竞争对手并从公开渠道生成结构化销售战卡。

  • 覆盖官网、评论、广告、社交媒体与定价等多维度信息,输出可立即使用的销售资料。
  • 专为 PM 团队打造,强调差异化与弱点挖掘,而非中立对比。
  • 安装命令:npx skills add https://github.com/nikiandr/goose-skills --skill battlecard-generator。
  • 需持续更新数据源,确保信息时效性与准确性以提升竞争力。

SKILL.md

Battlecard Generator

Research a competitor from every public angle — website, reviews, ads, social, pricing — and produce a structured sales battlecard. The output is what a rep opens 5 minutes before a competitive deal.

Built for: PMMs building competitive programs without a dedicated competitive intel team. The battlecard should be opinionated, not a neutral feature comparison.

When to Use

  • "Build a battlecard against [competitor]"
  • "We keep losing deals to [competitor] — help me understand why"
  • "What are [competitor]'s weaknesses we can exploit?"
  • "Prep the sales team for competitive deals against [competitor]"
  • "Research [competitor] and give me competitive positioning"

Phase 0: Intake

  1. Your product name + URL
  2. Competitor name + URL — One competitor per battlecard (focused > broad)
  3. Deal context — Where do you compete? (same ICP, upmarket/downmarket, different use case?)
  4. Known win/loss signals — Any patterns from deals you've won or lost against them?
  5. Sales team size — Are reps technical or business-focused? (affects language level)
  6. Existing positioning — Your one-line positioning vs this competitor (if any)

Phase 1: Competitor Research

1A: Website & Messaging Analysis

Fetch: [competitor] homepage, pricing page, about page, product page
Search: "[competitor]" "we help" OR "the only" OR "unlike"
Search: "[competitor]" case study OR customer story

Extract:

  • Hero claim — their primary positioning
  • Category — what category do they place themselves in?
  • Target audience — who do they say they serve?
  • Key features emphasized — what do they lead with?
  • Social proof — customer logos, metrics, quotes
  • Pricing structure — plans, pricing model, enterprise vs self-serve

1B: Review Intelligence

Search: "[competitor]" site:g2.com OR site:capterra.com
Search: "[competitor]" reviews "switched from" OR "moved to"

From reviews, extract:

  • Top 5 praised features (their moat — don't compete here directly)
  • Top 5 complaints (your attack angles)
  • Switching signals — why do customers leave?
  • ICP patterns — what roles/company sizes review them?

1C: Ad & Content Analysis

Search: "[competitor]" advertisement OR sponsored
Search: "[competitor]" vs OR alternative OR compare

Extract:

  • Ad messaging — what claims do they pay to promote?
  • Comparison pages — have they published "us vs X" pages?
  • Content themes — what topics do they create content around?

1D: Social & Community Signals

Search: "[competitor]" site:reddit.com OR site:twitter.com complaints OR issues
Search: "[competitor]" "looking for alternative" OR "anyone use"

Extract:

  • Common frustrations discussed publicly
  • Feature requests their users are vocal about
  • Sentiment patterns — do users love or tolerate them?

1E: Pricing Deep Dive

Fetch: [competitor] pricing page
Search: "[competitor]" pricing OR cost OR "how much"

Map their pricing:

  • Model: Per seat / usage-based / flat rate / hybrid
  • Tiers: What's in each tier?
  • Free tier: What's included? What's gated?
  • Enterprise: Custom pricing? What triggers enterprise sales?
  • Hidden costs: Implementation, overages, add-ons?

Phase 2: Competitive Analysis

Strengths & Weaknesses Matrix

DimensionThemUsNet
[Feature area 1][Rating + context][Rating + context]Win/Lose/Tie
[Feature area 2].........
Pricing.........
Ease of use.........
Support.........
Integrations.........

Where We Win (lead with these)

  1. [Strength] — [Evidence from research]
  2. [Strength] — [Evidence]
  3. [Strength] — [Evidence]

Where We Lose (don't engage here)

  1. [Weakness] — [Mitigation strategy]
  2. [Weakness] — [How to reframe]

Where It's Close (differentiate on narrative)

  1. [Area] — [How to position the tie as a win]

Phase 3: Output — Battlecard

# Battlecard: [Your Product] vs [Competitor]
Last updated: [DATE] | Confidence: [High/Medium — based on data freshness]

---

## Quick Reference (The 30-Second Version)

**They say:** "[Their positioning headline]"
**We say:** "[Our counter-positioning]"
**We win when:** [Deal profile where we have advantage]
**We lose when:** [Deal profile where they have advantage]
**Best opening move:** "[Question or statement to frame the deal]"

---

## Competitor Overview

| | [Competitor] |
|---|---|
| **Founded** | [Year] |
| **Funding** | [Amount / stage] |
| **Headcount** | [Estimate] |
| **Target market** | [Who they serve] |
| **Pricing** | [Model + range] |
| **Category** | [How they position] |

---

## Positioning Traps

Questions to ask early in the deal that frame the evaluation in your favor:

1. **"[Question that highlights your strength]"**
   → If they say [X], you win because [reason]
   → If they say [Y], pivot to [angle]

2. **"[Question that exposes competitor weakness]"**
   → Their answer will likely be [X], which reveals [limitation]

3. **"[Question about a capability they lack]"**
   → They can't do this. When the prospect asks them, it plants doubt.

---

## Landmine Questions

Drop these casually — they'll come up when the prospect evaluates the competitor:

- "Have you asked [competitor] about [specific limitation]?"
- "When you evaluate [competitor], make sure to test [area where they're weak]."
- "One thing worth checking: [competitor] pricing can get expensive once you [usage trigger]."

---

## Objection Handling

### "Why shouldn't we just go with [Competitor]?"
> "[Direct response — acknowledge their strength, pivot to your differentiation]"

### "[Competitor] has more features / is more established"
> "[Response — focus on what matters for this buyer's use case, not feature count]"

### "[Competitor] is cheaper"
> "[Response — reframe on total cost, hidden costs, or value per dollar]"

### "[Competitor] has [big customer logo]"
> "[Response — your relevant social proof + why logo != fit]"

### "We're already using [Competitor]"
> "[Response — switching cost vs cost of staying, what's changed]"

---

## Feature Comparison (Honest Assessment)

| Capability | Us | [Competitor] | Verdict |
|-----------|-----|-------------|---------|
| [Feature 1] | [Status + context] | [Status + context] | [Who wins + why] |
| [Feature 2] | ... | ... | ... |
| [Feature 3] | ... | ... | ... |
| Pricing transparency | ... | ... | ... |
| Onboarding speed | ... | ... | ... |
| Support quality | ... | ... | ... |

---

## Their Customers Say (From Reviews)

### What they love (don't fight these):
- "[Quote from review]" — [Platform, Role]
- "[Quote]" — ...

### What they hate (exploit these):
- "[Quote from negative review]" — [Platform, Role]
- "[Quote]" — ...
- "[Quote]" — ...

---

## Pricing Comparison

| | Us | [Competitor] |
|---|---|---|
| **Entry price** | [$/mo] | [$/mo] |
| **Mid-tier** | [$/mo] | [$/mo] |
| **Enterprise** | [Custom / $X] | [Custom / $X] |
| **Free tier** | [What's included] | [What's included] |
| **Hidden costs** | [None / list] | [Implementation, overages, etc.] |

**Pricing attack angle:** [How to frame pricing comparison favorably]

---

## Win Themes (What Wins Deals)

Based on competitive patterns:
1. **[Theme]** — "[Proof point or quote]"
2. **[Theme]** — ...
3. **[Theme]** — ...

## Loss Themes (What Loses Deals)

Be aware — we tend to lose when:
1. **[Pattern]** — Mitigation: [strategy]
2. **[Pattern]** — Mitigation: [strategy]

---

## Quick Responses for Email/Chat

**When prospect mentions [competitor]:**
> "[2-sentence response for email or Slack]"

**When asked for a comparison:**
> "[3-sentence elevator pitch vs competitor]"

Save to clients/<client-name>/product-marketing/battlecards/vs-[competitor-slug]-[YYYY-MM-DD].md.

Cost

ComponentCost
Web researchFree
Review mining (optional, via review-scraper)~$0.50-1.00
Ad analysis (optional, via ad scrapers)~$0.50-1.00
All analysis and battlecard generationFree (LLM reasoning)
TotalFree — $2

Tools Required

  • web_search — for competitor research
  • fetch_webpage — for site analysis
  • Optional: review-scraper for G2/Capterra mining
  • Optional: meta-ad-scraper, google-ad-scraper for ad intelligence

Trigger Phrases

  • "Build a battlecard against [competitor]"
  • "Competitive intel on [competitor]"
  • "Run the battlecard generator for [competitor]"
  • "Help me win deals against [competitor]"

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

35.75%
按下载量换算192

Claude

30.49%
按下载量换算163

Cursor

16.72%
按下载量换算90

Gemini CLI

9.73%
按下载量换算52

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills