icp-research
Skill70 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub
Builds an ideal customer profile from evidence: case studies, testimonials, customer logos, solutions pages, reviews and any sales notes you have. Produces market sizing layers, firmographic segments, a champion and an economic buyer persona, a negative ICP, intent signals, customer proof points and a voice-of-customer section in the buyers' own words, every claim sourced. Triggers: "ICP research", "ideal customer profile", "who are our customers", "customer segments", "buyer personas", "who should we target". Run after /company-context. Not for competitor analysis (use /competitor-research) or call transcript patterns (use /win-loss).
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
5
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
- Distinctive: line 22
Before positioning or messaging work, when nobody can say who the best customers are in one sentence.
- Distinctive: line 23
When sales keeps chasing deals that don't close and you suspect the target is too broad.
- Very specific: line 25
Don't use it to analyse sales calls (/win-loss) or competitors (/competitor-research).
- Distinctive: line 33
If a recommended input is missing, run from what you have and list what's missing in the data gaps section.
- Very specific: line 35
Paths: Write to context/icp/MMYY-icp.md.
- Distinctive: line 45
Normalise the attributes: Put size, industry and region into consistent bands so you can count them.
- Distinctive: line 77
Every customer named is public or came from the user's own data.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 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
ICP research
Work out who actually buys, who signs, who uses it and who isn't a fit, from what customers have said and done in public and in your own records. The output is the ICP file every later skill reads before it writes a word.
When to use it
- Building the context folder, right after
/company-context. - Before positioning or messaging work, when nobody can say who the best customers are in one sentence.
- When sales keeps chasing deals that don't close and you suspect the target is too broad.
Don't use it to analyse sales calls (/win-loss) or competitors (/competitor-research).
Inputs
Required: the company website URL. If it's missing, ask.
Recommended: context/company/ from /company-context; links to case studies and testimonials; a customer list or CRM export (strip names and emails first); sales notes on wins and objections; any existing ICP document to check against.
If a recommended input is missing, run from what you have and list what's missing in the data gaps section.
Paths. Write to context/icp/MMYY-icp.md. Agency or consultant? Swap context/ for clients/<client>/context/ throughout.
Tools. Web search and page fetching are enough. Exa or Firecrawl help if you have them. Review sites (G2, Capterra) and the company's LinkedIn page are useful public sources.
Steps
- Find the evidence pages. Customers, case studies, testimonials, solutions or industry pages, pricing, integrations, review sites. Produces: a source list with URLs and access dates.
- Extract raw data per customer. Company name, industry, size, region, role of the person quoted, the problem they described, the outcome they reported, tools they mention. Produces: a customer evidence table.
- Normalise the attributes. Put size, industry and region into consistent bands so you can count them.
- Find the segments. Count which industries, sizes and regions repeat. A segment needs several customers behind it, not one logo. Produces: 2 to 4 candidate segments with counts.
- Size the market in layers. Total market, the part you can serve, the part you can realistically win, and the ICP as the best slice of that. Show the maths and mark estimates. Each layer must be smaller than the one above.
- Build two personas. The champion (who feels the pain and pushes for the purchase) and the economic buyer (who signs). Cover goals, pains, triggers, objections and how each one judges success. They must read differently.
- Write the negative ICP. Who looks like a fit but isn't, and the signals that disqualify them.
- List intent signals and buying triggers. Observable events that show a company is ready: a new hire, funding, a tool change, a regulation, a growth milestone.
- Collect proof points. Named customers with outcomes and URLs. Only customers referenced in public or in data the user gave you.
- Synthesise voice of customer. Exact phrases customers use for their problem and their outcome. Quote, don't paraphrase.
- Recommend the priority segment. Rank the segments and say why the first one wins.
- List data gaps and what would fill them (interviews, CRM fields, win-loss).
Output shape
Open with a 3-line TLDR and a short block of open questions. Then:
- Header: date, website, confidence score 1 to 5.
- Market sizing layers with the maths.
- Firmographics: industry, size, region, tech stack patterns.
- Personas: champion, economic buyer, and users or influencers if relevant.
- Negative ICP.
- Customer proof points.
- Voice of customer.
- Segment definitions, ranked, with intent signals.
- Recommendations.
- Data gaps.
- Sources with URLs, dates and confidence.
Sort roles as champion, economic buyer, user, influencer. Sort sizes from largest to smallest.
What good looks like
- Every customer named is public or came from the user's own data.
- Quotes are verbatim and attributed to a role.
- The champion and the economic buyer have different pains and different success measures.
- The negative ICP excludes real companies someone might chase.
- Segment claims show their count ("6 of 14 case studies"). Small samples are flagged once, not repeated in every section.
- The confidence score matches the evidence: mostly high-confidence sources score 4 or 5, mostly estimates score 1 or 2.
Mistakes to avoid
- Inventing customer names or composite quotes.
- Personas built from imagination ("Marketing Mary, 34, loves podcasts").
- Market sizing that grows as it narrows, or a top-down number with no maths.
- Calling one big logo a segment.
- Writing the same caveat in every section. Say it once and point to it.
Chain
Part of the free five-skill chain: icp-research → /competitor-research → /tov-guidelines → /positioning → /messaging. The other six context skills (company context, win-loss, founder POV, brand kit, funnel and goals) are in the paid context plugin ($19.99, link in the README).
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- matteotitta/repo-structure-in-house★ 70100% same
Edited · 1
- matteotitta/claude-marketing-context★ 097% same
Wrote their own version · 3
- growthack88/growth-marketing-os★ 117same name
- matteotitta/genesys-skills★ 46same name
- esmefong/gtm-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.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use company-context.
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.
nocodeworkSkillcompany-context
Interview the user to build or update a reusable company context file for AI tools — what the company does, its offer, clients, personas, positioning, voice, and the questions clients ask most. Use when the user says "build our company context", "create company context", "set up business context for AI", "update our company context", or wants AI to answer clients and write content in the company's voice without re-explaining the business each time. Produces company-context.md.
Also in 3 projects that use this
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- context/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- outputs/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- competitor-researchSkill
- levelSkill
- messagingSkill
- positioningSkill
- tov-guidelinesSkill
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.

