• 00-intake/brief.md

  — product description and context

• 01-discovery/competitor-landscape.md

  — competitor profiles

• 01-discovery/target-audience.md

  — customer personas, pain points

• 02-strategy/positioning.md

  — initial positioning work

• intake.md

  — product and market context

• competitors-report.md

  — strategic competitive analysis

• battle-cards/

  — per-competitor profiles

• pricing-landscape.md

  — pricing analysis

• Extract the product description, known competitors, and customer pain points
• Use competitor profiles and battle cards to seed the competitive alternatives map
• Pull any existing positioning work as a starting hypothesis to test, not a conclusion to keep
• Use customer language and pain points to inform JTBD discovery

• What's your product? (one sentence is fine)
• What problem does it solve and for whom?
• What do your customers do today instead of using you? (alternatives, workarounds, doing nothing)
• Who are your best existing customers? (if any — describe them, not demographics)

• How is your product different from the alternatives you mentioned?
• Have you tried positioning before? What didn't work?
• Are there competitors you're often compared to?

Agent

• Agent tool available (Claude Code): Spawn all agents within each wave in parallel. This is faster.
• Agent tool NOT available (Claude.ai, web): Execute research sequentially, following the same templates. Same depth, just slower.

Reference: Read

references/research-principles.md

before starting any wave. It defines source quality tiers, cross-referencing rules, and how to handle data gaps.

Reference: Read

references/research-wave-1-alternatives.md

for agent templates.

Reference: Read

references/research-wave-2-market-frame.md

for agent templates.

Reference: Read

references/research-synthesis.md

for synthesis protocol and Dunford process details.

1. Competitive Alternatives — From Wave 1. What would customers use if your product didn't exist? This is the anchor — positioning is always relative.
2. Unique Attributes — What do you have that the alternatives lack? Be specific and honest. Features, architecture, team expertise, business model, speed — anything defensible.
   ⏸ PAUSE — User Input Required. Present the research-derived attributes to the user. Ask them to confirm, add, or remove before proceeding to Value Themes. The founder knows capabilities that research can't surface.
3. Value Themes — Translate each unique attribute into a customer outcome. Attribute → "so what?" → value. Group related attributes into 2-3 value themes. Use customer language from Wave 1's language map.
4. Best-Fit Customers — From Wave 1 customer intelligence. Who cares most about your value themes? Define by characteristics that make them care, not demographics. These customers should be reachable, recognizable, and willing to pay.
5. Market Category — From Wave 2. Choose the category frame that makes your value obvious. Present 3-5 options with trade-offs. Recommend one. The right category triggers the right buyer expectations.
6. Trend Overlay (optional) — From Wave 2. Only include if a genuine trend makes your positioning stronger. Forced trend alignment is worse than none.

"Our [product] is the only [category] that [differentiator]."

"Our [product] is the only [category] that [differentiator] for [target] who [need] in [context]."

• Is it simple enough to remember?
• Does it claim one clear rung?
• Is that rung available (not owned by a competitor)?
• Can you explain it in one sentence?

# {Title}: {product}

*Skill: startup-positioning | Generated: {date}*

references/research-synthesis.md

{project-name}/positioning-doc.md

• Executive summary (positioning in 3 sentences)
• The 5+1 components with supporting evidence
• Strength assessment per component (Strong / Moderate / Needs Work)
• Strategic recommendations and next steps
• Data gaps & limitations

{project-name}/positioning-statement.md

• Moore template: "For [target] who [need], [product] is a [category] that [benefit]. Unlike [alternative], we [differentiator]."
• Neumeier Onliness Statement (basic + extended)
• Elevator pitch (30-second version)
• Tagline candidates with stress-tested "Possible Misread" column
• One-liner variants for different channels (GitHub, marketplace, social, elevator)
• Freemium positioning (if applicable)

{project-name}/competitive-alternatives.md

• All alternatives (direct, adjacent, manual, status quo)
• Per alternative: job hired for, strengths, shortcomings, switching triggers
• Your unique attributes vs. each alternative

{project-name}/market-category-analysis.md

• 3-5 candidate categories with buyer expectations
• Category type assessment (head-to-head / subcategory / creation)
• Recommendation with reasoning
• Implementation (category label, tagline direction, buyer expectation alignment)
• Red flags and yellow flags

{project-name}/messaging-implications.md

• Messaging hierarchy (what to communicate first, second, third)
• Category label (exact phrase to use everywhere)
• Value anchor (what to compare value to, separate from category)
• Customer language vs. category language map (which words are customer verbs, which are category nouns)
• Words to use / avoid
• Social proof guidelines
• Freemium positioning (if applicable)

{project-name}/raw/

• alternative-mapping.md

• customer-intelligence.md

• market-categories.md

• trends-timing.md

Reference: Read

references/honesty-protocol.md

for full protocol and anti-pattern details.

1. No aspirational positioning. Position on what you ARE, not what you hope to become. Aspirational positioning crumbles at first customer contact.
2. Challenge "we're unique." The Onliness Test must be genuinely convincing. If it reads like marketing fluff, iterate.
3. Research wins over narrative. When customer data contradicts internal beliefs about positioning, the data wins.
4. Flag category creation risk. Most startups can't afford to educate a market. Default to existing categories unless the evidence is overwhelming.

references/honesty-protocol.md