agentleFS
VercelKnown publishervercel-labs/marketing-team-eve-template/agent/subagents/product-marketer/skills/positioning/SKILL.md

positioning

Skill459 starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when working out what a product is, who it's for, and what it competes with: the market alternatives, the ideal customer, the differentiators worth claiming, and the positioning statement that follows.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 15 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Ask the user directly what the last few customers used before, and take the most common answer over the most flattering one.

    line 21

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 15 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Positioning

Positioning is not a tagline. It's a decision about which market you're in and who you're beating, and the words come last. Work it in order, because each step constrains the next.

  1. What would this customer do if the product didn't exist? That's the real alternative, and it is often a spreadsheet, a contractor, an intern, or nothing at all rather than a competitor.
  2. What can you do that those alternatives can't? Only features that are actually hard to copy count here.
  3. What is the value that follows from those features, stated as something a customer gets rather than something the product has?
  4. Who cares most about that value? Not everyone who could use it: the segment that feels its absence most.
  5. What market does that put you in? The category the customer already searches, or a new one you have to teach.

Get 1, 2, and 4 right and the statement writes itself. Skip to the statement and you get something true of every product in the category.

Choosing the alternative you beat

The alternative determines everything downstream, and picking the wrong one is the most expensive error available. Positioning against a well-funded incumbent when your customers actually arrive from a spreadsheet means your messaging answers questions nobody is asking.

Ask the user directly what the last few customers used before, and take the most common answer over the most flattering one.

What counts as a differentiator

A differentiator survives three tests. It has to be true, provable, and hard to copy. Fail any one and it isn't yours to claim.

  • True: the product actually does it today, not on the roadmap.
  • Provable: you can point at a customer, a number, a demo, or a doc.
  • Hard to copy: a competitor can't ship it next quarter. Being cheaper is rarely defensible; being architecturally different usually is.

Things that feel like differentiators and aren't: being easy to use, caring about customers, being fast, having a modern interface, being AI-powered. Every competitor claims all of these, so claiming them positions you nowhere. If a competitor's site would say the same sentence, delete it.

Segments

A segment is useful when its members share a problem, a budget, and a way of finding you. "Mid-market" is a size, not a segment. "Series B companies whose finance team still closes the books in spreadsheets" is a segment, because it predicts the problem, the buyer, and the search.

Pick the narrowest segment that can still support the business. Broad positioning feels safer and converts worse, because a message addressed to everyone sounds addressed to no one.

The statement

One paragraph, internal, written to be checked rather than published:

For [segment] who [situation and problem], [product] is a [category] that [key benefit]. Unlike [the real alternative], it [the differentiator, with proof].

Then test it. Would a competitor's marketing team write the same sentence? Could a customer disagree with it? Does it name something you can prove? If any answer is wrong, the problem is upstream in the five questions, not in the wording.

references/frameworks.md has the fuller worked structure, a positioning-map format for handing back a competitive picture, and the failure patterns worth recognizing.

Leaving it unresolved

Sometimes the honest output is that the positioning isn't settled: the differentiator is unproven, or two segments are pulling in different directions. Say that. Write the options and what evidence would decide between them, rather than picking one and presenting it as concluded. The team can work with a stated question; it can't recover from confident guessing.

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions17 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 17

    1. RefoundAI/lenny-skills★ 1.3ksame name
    2. matteotitta/claude-code-marketing-quickstart★ 70same name
    3. matteotitta/repo-structure-in-house★ 70same name
    4. nahid-sparktales/agent-dispatcher★ 59same name
    5. Infinite-Labs-AI/infinite-skills★ 43same name
    6. Dragoon0x/product-skills★ 4same name
    7. protocol/perun★ 2same name
    8. remigiusz-antczak/deep-code-review★ 2same name
    9. solanabr/startup-builder-skill★ 2same name
    10. buildingwithai/skills★ 1same name

    7 more not listed

    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 tov-guidelines, icp-research and 1 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.
    • matteotittaSkill

      tov-guidelines

      Extracts a company's tone of voice from its own content and turns it into rules a writer or an AI can follow. Phase 1 analyses 15 to 20 pages for sentence, paragraph, word and structure patterns with frequency counts; after the user reviews it, Phase 2 writes the guidelines: tone attributes with before and after examples, a We are / We are not table, tone by context, vocabulary to use and avoid, and open questions. Triggers: "tone of voice", "brand voice", "voice guidelines", "writing style guide", "extract voice from our website", "TOV". Not for visual identity (use /brand-kit) or messaging (use /messaging).

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • matteotittaSkill

      icp-research

      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).

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • YepAPISkill

      competitor-research

      Competitive analysis between domains using YepAPI.

      Also in 3 projects that use this

  • In this repository21 other files it gives its agents.

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.