Source profileQuality 92/100

travisjneuman/.claude/skills/battle-card-builder/SKILL.md

battle-card-builder

Competitive battle card creation for sales teams combining competitive intelligence, sales enablement, and document formatting. Use when building battle cards, competitive analysis decks, or win/loss analysis materials.

Source repository stars
94
Declared platforms
0
Static risk flags
0
Last source update
2026-08-13
Source checked
2026-08-25

Decision brief

What it does: where it fits

Structured frameworks for creating competitive battle cards that help sales teams win against specific competitors.

Best for

  • Use when building battle cards, competitive analysis decks, or win/loss analysis materials.

Not for

  • Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
  • Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.

Compatibility matrix

Platform support, with evidence labels

PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
CodexNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Claude CodeNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Open the compatibility checker

Installation

Inspect first. Install second.

The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

Source-detected install commandSource
npx skills add https://github.com/travisjneuman/.claude --skill "skills/battle-card-builder"
Safe inspection promptEditorial

Inspect the Agent Skill "battle-card-builder" from https://github.com/travisjneuman/.claude/blob/b8b4dd55d61b9f25d33e3b5427870641a1c8c39c/skills/battle-card-builder/SKILL.md at commit b8b4dd55d61b9f25d33e3b5427870641a1c8c39c. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

Workflow

What the source asks the agent to do

  1. 01

    Battle Card Structure

    Review the “Battle Card Structure” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Battle Card Structure” source section.
  2. 02

    Standard Battle Card Sections

    Review the “Standard Battle Card Sections” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Standard Battle Card Sections” source section.
  3. 03

    Competitive Intelligence Gathering

    Review the “Competitive Intelligence Gathering” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Competitive Intelligence Gathering” source section.
  4. 04

    Intelligence Sources

    Review the “Intelligence Sources” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Intelligence Sources” source section.
  5. 05

    Intelligence Collection Framework

    Review the “Intelligence Collection Framework” section in the pinned source before continuing.

    Review and apply the “Intelligence Collection Framework” source section.

Permission review

Static risk signals and limitations

No configured static risk pattern was detected

This is not proof of safety. Runtime behavior, indirect dependencies, and hidden external systems are outside the static scan.

Evidence record

Why each signal appears

EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
Quality score92/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
Repository stars94SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
Compatibility0 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

Pinned source

Provenance and original SKILL.md

Repository
travisjneuman/.claude
Skill path
skills/battle-card-builder/SKILL.md
Commit
b8b4dd55d61b9f25d33e3b5427870641a1c8c39c
License
MIT
Collected
2026-08-25
Default branch
master
View the original SKILL.md

Battle Card Builder

Structured frameworks for creating competitive battle cards that help sales teams win against specific competitors.

Battle Card Structure

Standard Battle Card Sections

BATTLE CARD LAYOUT:

1. COMPETITOR SNAPSHOT (top of page)
   - Company name, logo, tagline
   - Founded, HQ, headcount, funding/revenue
   - Target market and primary use case
   - Threat level: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW

2. QUICK COMPARISON TABLE
   - Feature-by-feature comparison
   - Pricing comparison
   - Target customer comparison

3. OUR STRENGTHS (vs. this competitor)
   - 3-5 key advantages with proof points
   - Customer quotes that validate each strength

4. THEIR STRENGTHS (honest assessment)
   - 2-3 areas where competitor excels
   - How to acknowledge without conceding

5. OBJECTION HANDLING
   - Top 5-7 objections prospects raise
   - Recommended responses for each

6. WIN THEMES
   - 3-4 messaging themes that resonate
   - Discovery questions to surface our advantages

7. LANDMINES
   - Questions to plant that expose competitor weaknesses
   - Features to demo that highlight differentiation

8. RECENT INTEL
   - Latest product releases or changes
   - Pricing changes
   - Key wins/losses
   - Last updated date

Competitive Intelligence Gathering

Intelligence Sources

SourceData TypeRefresh FrequencyReliability
Competitor websitePricing, features, messagingMonthlyHigh
G2/Capterra reviewsUser sentiment, complaintsMonthlyMedium-High
Job postingsStrategic direction, tech stackQuarterlyMedium
SEC filings / investor decksRevenue, strategy, risksQuarterlyHigh
Patent filingsFuture product directionQuarterlyMedium
Win/loss interviewsReal buyer reasoningOngoingHigh
Sales call recordingsObjections, competitor mentionsOngoingHigh
Industry analyst reportsMarket positioningAnnuallyHigh
Social media / forumsProduct issues, sentimentWeeklyLow-Medium
Conference presentationsRoadmap, visionAs availableMedium

Intelligence Collection Framework

COLLECTION CADENCE:

WEEKLY:
- Social listening for competitor mentions
- Review new G2/Capterra reviews
- Check competitor blog/news for announcements

MONTHLY:
- Full website and pricing page review
- Feature comparison audit
- Gong/Chorus analysis of competitor mentions in calls
- Win/loss interview synthesis

QUARTERLY:
- Deep competitive analysis refresh
- Battle card full update
- Sales team feedback collection
- Market positioning reassessment

ANNUALLY:
- Comprehensive competitive landscape review
- Strategic differentiation audit
- Battle card rebuild from scratch

Positioning Frameworks

Competitive Positioning Matrix

POSITIONING MAP:

                    HIGH CAPABILITY
                         |
                         |
     NICHE LEADER        |        MARKET LEADER
     (deep in segment)   |        (broad + deep)
                         |
   ─────────────────────+──────────────────────
     LOW REACH           |        HIGH REACH
                         |
     EMERGING PLAYER     |        BROAD PLAYER
     (limited scope)     |        (wide but shallow)
                         |
                    LOW CAPABILITY

POSITION US: [where we sit]
POSITION COMPETITOR: [where they sit]
NARRATIVE: "While [Competitor] covers more ground, we go deeper
            in [our segment] where it matters most for [buyer]."

Differentiation Categories

CategoryOur PositionCompetitor PositionTalking Point
Product[specific feature/capability][their approach][why ours matters]
Technology[architecture/approach][their architecture][technical advantage]
Service[support model][their support model][customer impact]
Price[pricing model][their pricing model][value story]
Market Focus[our ICP][their ICP][specialization benefit]
Integration[ecosystem fit][their ecosystem][workflow advantage]
Security[certifications/approach][their posture][trust factor]

Objection Handling Templates

Objection Response Framework

STRUCTURE FOR EVERY OBJECTION:

ACKNOWLEDGE: Validate the concern without agreeing
BRIDGE:      Transition to your perspective
RESPOND:     Address with evidence and specifics
EVIDENCE:    Proof point (customer, data, demo)

EXAMPLE:

OBJECTION: "[Competitor] has more integrations than you."

ACKNOWLEDGE: "Integration breadth is important — I understand
              why that's a factor in your evaluation."

BRIDGE: "What we've found with customers in your space is that
         it's less about the total number and more about depth
         of the integrations you actually use."

RESPOND: "We have 40+ integrations focused on [their stack],
          with bi-directional sync and real-time data flow.
          [Competitor]'s integrations are often one-directional
          or require manual configuration."

EVIDENCE: "[Customer X] evaluated both and chose us specifically
           because our [specific integration] saved their team
           12 hours per week vs. the manual workaround with
           [Competitor]'s connector."

Common Objection Categories

PRICING OBJECTIONS:
- "They're cheaper"
- "We can't justify the premium"
- "Their free tier is sufficient"

FEATURE OBJECTIONS:
- "They have [feature] that you don't"
- "Their product does more"
- "We need [specific capability]"

MARKET OBJECTIONS:
- "They're the market leader"
- "Everyone in our industry uses them"
- "They have more customers like us"

RISK OBJECTIONS:
- "They're a bigger, safer company"
- "What if you get acquired?"
- "We're already using them and switching is risky"

RELATIONSHIP OBJECTIONS:
- "We already have a contract with them"
- "Our team is trained on their platform"
- "Our exec has a personal relationship there"

Win Theme Templates

Discovery Questions That Favor Us

QUESTION DESIGN PRINCIPLE:
Ask questions whose honest answers reveal competitor weaknesses
without mentioning the competitor by name.

FORMAT:
Question → Expected Answer → Bridge to Our Strength

EXAMPLES:

Q: "How important is [our strength area] to your workflow?"
A: [Prospect describes importance]
B: "That's exactly where we've invested most deeply..."

Q: "What's your experience been with [pain our product solves]?"
A: [Prospect describes pain]
B: "We hear that a lot from teams who've used [category]. Here's
    how we approach it differently..."

Q: "When you evaluated solutions before, what fell short?"
A: [Prospect describes gaps]
B: "Those are the exact gaps we were built to fill..."

Landmine Questions

LANDMINE STRATEGY:
Plant questions the prospect will ask the competitor that
expose their weaknesses.

TEMPLATE:
"When you're evaluating [Competitor], you might want to ask
them about [specific weakness area]. Specifically:

1. [Question about their known limitation]
2. [Question about their pricing gotcha]
3. [Question about their support gap]

These are areas where we've seen prospects get surprised during
implementation, and it's worth clarifying upfront."

RULES:
- Never lie or exaggerate competitor weaknesses
- Base landmines on documented, verified issues
- Keep it professional — attack the product, not the people
- Be prepared for the competitor to do the same to you

Pricing Comparison Framework

Pricing Analysis Template

PRICING COMPARISON:

                    US              COMPETITOR
──────────────────────────────────────────────────
Model:              [per seat]      [per usage]
Entry Price:        $___/mo         $___/mo
Mid-Market:         $___/mo         $___/mo
Enterprise:         $___/mo         $___/mo

HIDDEN COSTS:
- Implementation:   [included]      [$X extra]
- Support:          [included]      [paid tier]
- Integrations:     [included]      [add-on]
- Storage/Usage:    [included]      [overage fees]

TRUE TCO (3-year, 100 users):
Us:         $______
Competitor: $______
Savings:    $______ (__%)

WIN NARRATIVE:
"While their list price appears [lower/similar], when you factor
in [hidden cost 1] and [hidden cost 2], the total cost of
ownership over 3 years is actually [X%] higher."

Battle Card Maintenance

Update Cadence

ComponentUpdate FrequencyOwner
Competitor snapshotQuarterlyCompetitive Intel
Feature comparisonMonthlyProduct Marketing
Pricing comparisonQuarterly (or on change)Pricing Team
Objection handlingMonthly (from win/loss)Sales Enablement
Win themesQuarterlyProduct Marketing
Customer proof pointsMonthlyCustomer Marketing
Recent intelWeeklyCompetitive Intel

Staleness Indicators

BATTLE CARD IS STALE WHEN:

RED FLAGS:
- Last updated > 90 days ago
- Competitor released major product update since last refresh
- Win rate against competitor dropped > 5% QoQ
- Sales reps report card is "not useful"
- Pricing information is outdated

HEALTH CHECK QUESTIONS:
- When was this last updated? [date]
- Has competitor launched anything since? [Y/N]
- Have we validated with recent win/loss data? [Y/N]
- Do sales reps actively use this card? [Y/N]
- Is our proof point data current? [Y/N]

Win/Loss Integration

WIN/LOSS DATA COLLECTION:

AFTER EVERY COMPETITIVE DEAL:
1. Record outcome (win/loss)
2. Document primary reasons (top 3)
3. Note competitor strengths that resonated
4. Note our strengths that resonated
5. Capture any new objections heard
6. Flag any pricing intelligence

QUARTERLY ANALYSIS:
- Win rate by competitor (trending)
- Top reasons for wins (reinforce in card)
- Top reasons for losses (address in card)
- New objections to add
- Proof points to update

Battle Card Quality Checklist

CheckStatus
Competitor info verified within last 30 days[ ]
Pricing data confirmed (not assumed)[ ]
At least 3 customer proof points per strength[ ]
Objection responses tested with top reps[ ]
Win themes validated by recent win/loss data[ ]
Honest about competitor strengths (credibility)[ ]
No unverified claims or speculation[ ]
Formatting is scannable (not wall of text)[ ]
Card fits on 2 pages (front and back)[ ]
Last updated date is visible[ ]

See Also

Frequently asked questions

What to verify before installation and use

What does the battle-card-builder source document cover?

Structured frameworks for creating competitive battle cards that help sales teams win against specific competitors.

How do I install battle-card-builder?

The source record exposes this install command: npx skills add https://github.com/travisjneuman/.claude --skill "skills/battle-card-builder". Inspect the command and pinned source before running it.

Alternatives

Compare before choosing

Computed 97152

JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills

suede-instagram-growth

Suede-owned Instagram growth operating system for account-specific audits, Reels, carousels, Stories, conversion mapping, calendars, and daily candidate-production loops. Use when the user names Instagram, IG, Reels, Stories, asks to analyze recent posts, grow a handle, run a daily workflow, create or repurpose Instagram content, or distinguish views from follows, leads, and sales. NOT FOR: multi-platform organic strategy (use suede-social), full video rendering or editing (use suede-video), pai

Computed 96223

yonatangross/orchestkit

brainstorm

Design exploration using parallel agents through a 7-phase process: topic analysis, memory context, divergent ideation (10+ ideas), feasibility filtering, evaluation with devil's advocate scoring (0-10 across 7 dimensions), synthesis of top approaches, and trade-off comparison. Supports open exploration, constrained design, comparison, quick ideation, and iterative optimization modes. Use when brainstorming ideas, exploring solutions, or comparing alternatives.

Computed 9630

johnqtcg/awesome-skills

stock-business-review

Review a US-listed company's business model and revenue structure for an equity-research workup. Covers product/service mix, customer concentration, geographic exposure, industry position, revenue-growth decomposition (organic vs acquired vs price vs volume), and information-tier discipline (which numbers are facts vs management narrative). Trigger when analyzing a single US ticker's business fundamentals, when reading 10-K Item 1 "Business" and Item 1A "Risk Factors", or when the orchestrator s

Computed 9630

johnqtcg/awesome-skills

stock-industry-review

Review a US-listed company's industry position and competitive moat for an equity-research workup. Covers Porter Five Forces scan, market-share trend (absolute and relative to industry growth), TAM size and trajectory, unit economics where disclosed (LTV/CAC, unit gross margin), moat classification (network / brand / scale-cost / switching-cost / patent / regulatory / proprietary-data), substitute threats, new-entrant threats, pricing-power evidence, supplier/channel concentration risk, and regu