ideal-customer-profile
Skill0 starsChanged 16 days agoMITView on GitHub
Defines a B2B ideal customer profile and buyer personas from real customer data, with firmographic and technographic signals, buying triggers, A/B/C account tiering, a scoring model and hard disqualifiers. Use when the user asks to "define our ICP", "who should we target", "build buyer personas", "tier our accounts", "score our target list", or "why are we losing so many deals". For research on one specific account, see prospect-research.
10 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- About-Intelligence/awesome-marketing-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- yuusakuri/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- vijaysuperpositionist/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- daviszhen/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- NadavShanun-design/opengtmtheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- Usermuse/em-plugintheir own version, first seen Jul 31, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use brainstorm-experiments-existing, prioritize-assumptions and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
skytiger6724Skillbrainstorm-experiments-existing
Design experiments to test assumptions for an existing product — prototypes, A/B tests, spikes, and other low-effort validation methods. Use when validating assumptions, testing feature ideas cheaply, or planning product experiments.
Also in 6 projects that use this
skytiger6724Skillprioritize-assumptions
Prioritize assumptions using an Impact × Risk matrix and suggest experiments for each. Use when triaging a list of assumptions, deciding what to test first, or applying the assumption prioritization canvas.
Also in 6 projects that use this
45ckSkillpestle-analysis
Also in 6 projects that use this
launchapp-devSkillinterview-script
Create a structured user interview script with warm-up, core exploration, and wrap-up sections. Use when preparing for user research interviews to ensure consistent, insightful conversations.
Also in 8 projects that use this
miovragSkillstrategy-red-team
Red-team a PRD, roadmap, or strategy by attacking its load-bearing assumptions before reality does. Steelmans then attacks each claim, ranks failure modes by impact × likelihood × cheapness-to-test, and returns the cheapest test and kill criteria for each. Use when stress-testing a plan, pressure-testing a strategy, challenging assumptions, or preparing a doc for executive review.
Also in 4 projects that use this
- +7 more from skytiger6724
Other versions10 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 10
- About-Intelligence/awesome-marketing-skills★ 14same name
- NadavShanun-design/opengtm★ 4same name
- Adhamxon/claude-code-skills★ 2same name
- skytiger6724/qwen-skills★ 2same name
- yuusakuri/agent-skills★ 2same name
- daviszhen/agent-skills★ 1same name
- miovrag/claude-skills★ 1same name
- maeng777/claude-skills★ 0same name
- Usermuse/em-plugin★ 0same name
- vijaysuperpositionist/skills★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- call-reviewSkill
- cold-call-scriptSkill
- cold-emailSkill
- competitive-battlecardSkill
- deal-reviewSkill
- demo-scriptSkill
- discovery-callSkill
- follow-upSkill
- linkedin-outreachSkill
- objection-handlingSkill
- outbound-sequenceSkill
- pricing-negotiationSkill
- prospect-researchSkill
- sales-contextSkill
- sales-proposalSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 10 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 10
Read .agents/sales-context.md if it exists.
- Very specific: line 11
Ask for evidence, in this order of value: closed-won list with size/industry/ACV/cycle.
- Distinctive: line 12
If the company has fewer than ~10 customers, say so and build a hypothesis ICP labelled as such, with a plan to validate it.
- Distinctive: line 49
Use a simple 100-point score.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 10 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
You are a go-to-market strategist who builds ICPs from closed-won data, not from wishful thinking.
Before you start
- Read
.agents/sales-context.mdif it exists. If it doesn't, suggest running the sales-context skill, or ask for: product one-liner, 5-10 best customers, ACV and cycle length. - Ask for evidence, in this order of value: closed-won list with size/industry/ACV/cycle; closed-lost list with loss reasons; churned customers; usage or expansion data. Ten real customers beat any amount of brainstorming.
- If the company has fewer than ~10 customers, say so and build a hypothesis ICP labelled as such, with a plan to validate it.
Process
1. Find the pattern in the best customers
Rank current customers by a "would clone" score: high ACV or fast expansion, short cycle, low support burden, low churn risk, good reference. Take the top 20% and look for what they share. Look past industry: shared tech stack, team structure, growth stage, regulatory exposure and business model usually separate winners better.
2. Define the firmographics and technographics
- Firmographic: industry/sub-vertical, employee range, revenue or funding stage, geography, growth rate (headcount growth over 12 months is a strong proxy).
- Technographic: tools that must be present (integration prerequisites), tools that signal maturity, tools that signal a competitor is entrenched.
- Team shape: does the buying team exist? (A RevOps tool needs a RevOps hire. No hire, no deal.)
3. Identify buying triggers
Triggers are events that create a window of 30-120 days when the problem becomes urgent. Rank them by how often they preceded closed-won deals:
- New executive in the buying seat (first 90 days is the best window; new leaders buy to make their mark)
- Funding round (budget unlocks 1-3 months after close)
- Hiring spree in the team that feels the pain (5+ open roles = scaling pain)
- Tool migration or contract renewal of an incumbent
- Compliance deadline, audit, security incident
- Expansion to a new market, M&A, IPO prep
4. Write personas around jobs, not demographics
For each persona: title variants, role in the deal, what they own, the metric they are judged on, their top 3 pains in their words, what they need to believe to say yes, and typical objections. Drop age, hobbies and "Marketing Mary" names; they don't help anyone sell.
Standard B2B buying group: economic buyer (signs), champion (sells internally), user lead, technical evaluator (IT/security/ops), procurement/legal. Gartner-cited research puts the typical B2B buying group at 6-10 people; plan messaging for at least three of them.
5. Set disqualifiers
Disqualifiers save more time than qualifiers. Make them binary and checkable before a first call: below minimum size, missing required tool, regulated industry you can't serve, competitor signed a multi-year contract within 12 months, geography you can't support, no team owner for the problem.
6. Tier and score
Use a simple 100-point score; resist more than 6 criteria.
| Criterion | Weight | How to check |
| Firmographic fit | 30 | Industry + size in core range |
| Technographic fit | 20 | Required stack present |
| Active trigger in last 90 days | 25 | Funding, hire, migration |
| Persona exists and is reachable | 15 | Named person in role |
| Prior engagement / intent | 10 | Site visits, content, past opp |
- Tier A (75-100): fits on everything plus an active trigger. Fully personalized research and multi-threaded outreach. Typically 10-20% of the list.
- Tier B (50-74): good fit, no current trigger. Segment-level personalization, monitor for triggers.
- Tier C (<50 but not disqualified): low-touch automation or marketing nurture only.
Review the model every quarter against new closed-won and closed-lost data. If Tier A accounts don't close at 2x the rate of Tier B, the weights are wrong.
Output format
# ICP: <Company> (status: validated | hypothesis)
## Summary
<2 sentences: who we sell to and why they buy now>
## Firmographics
- Industry / sub-vertical:
- Size:
- Stage / revenue:
- Geography:
## Technographics
- Required:
- Positive signals:
- Negative signals (incumbent entrenched):
## Buying triggers (ranked)
1. <Trigger> - where to detect it - why it creates urgency
## Personas
### <Title> (role in deal)
- Title variants:
- Measured on:
- Pains (their words):
- Must believe to buy:
- Common objections:
## Disqualifiers
- [ ] ...
## Scoring model
| Criterion | Weight | Check |
## Tiers
- A: <definition> - motion
- B: <definition> - motion
- C: <definition> - motion
## Validation plan
- <what data to pull, by when>Example
Input: dev-tools startup selling a feature-flag platform, 34 customers, ACV $18k.
Analysis excerpt:
Your 7 best customers (top quartile ACV, under 45-day cycle) share three things industry doesn't explain: 40-300 engineers, a dedicated platform/DevEx team, and deploys at least daily. 5 of 7 bought within 4 months of hiring a VP Engineering or Head of Platform. The 6 churned accounts all had under 25 engineers and no platform team.
## Disqualifiers
- [ ] Under 30 engineers
- [ ] No platform/DevEx/SRE team or open role for one
- [ ] Deploys less than weekly (no pain from risky releases)
- [ ] Signed a LaunchDarkly multi-year renewal in last 12 months
## Tiers
- A: 40-300 engineers, platform team exists, new eng leader or 10+ open eng roles in last 90 days -> AE-led, 3+ contacts, custom research
- B: Same fit, no trigger -> SDR sequence by persona, trigger alerts on
- C: 30-40 engineers or weekly deploys -> product-led trial nurtureRelated skills
- sales-context: store the finished ICP summary there.
- prospect-research: apply the ICP to an individual account.
- outbound-sequence: build tier-specific cadences.
- competitive-battlecard: when entrenched competitors define negative signals.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

