feat(skills): add marketing skills collection

shared/skills/prospecting/references/b2b-prospecting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+# B2B Prospecting Reference
+
+For when the user sells to non-SaaS B2B — services, agencies, manufacturers, mid-market and enterprise companies, professional services firms.
+
+---
+
+## ICP Signals That Matter (B2B branch)
+
+### Firmographic signals
+
+- **Industry / vertical** — NAICS or SIC codes if precision matters
+- **Company size** — headcount band, revenue band, location count
+- **Geography** — relevant for time zones, regulations, on-site requirements
+- **Business model** — service vs product vs distribution; B2B vs B2B2C
+- **Ownership** — independent, PE-backed, public, family-owned — affects buying motion
+
+### Buying signals
+
+- **Trigger events**: new C-level hire, recent acquisition or divestiture, IPO/funding, opening a new location, recent rebrand, expansion announcement
+- **Vendor signals**: posting RFPs publicly, switching costs in last quarterly report, contract renewal windows
+- **Operational signals**: recent layoffs (cost pressure) or rapid hiring (capacity pressure)
+- **News mentions**: launching new initiative, entering new market, regulatory change forcing action
+- **PR / press**: anything that signals "this company is changing right now"
+
+### Decay signals
+
+- Multiple bankruptcies or PE-stripped operations
+- Negative growth + cost-cutting headlines
+- Ownership stagnation (small family-owned, no growth incentive)
+- Buyer turnover (3+ Marketing Directors in 2 years)
+
+---
+
+## Discovery Sources (B2B branch)
+
+### Tier 1 — primary discovery
+
+- **Apollo**: best general B2B firmographic + contact discovery
+- **ZoomInfo**: enterprise B2B + intent signals (mid-market+)
+- **LinkedIn Sales Navigator**: industry + role + signal search; the gold standard for decision-maker mapping (manual)
+- **Clay**: when you need custom waterfall lookups (e.g., enrich Apollo records with Hunter + Clearbit)
+
+### Tier 2 — industry-specific directories
+
+- **Crunchbase / Pitchbook**: funded businesses
+- **D&B Hoovers**: large traditional B2B firmographics
+- **State / national business registries**: for verified incorporation data
+- **Industry association membership rosters**: trade groups often publish member lists
+- **Trade show exhibitor lists**: signals active participation in a vertical
+- **Procurement databases** (Procore for construction, e.g.): vertical-specific signals
+
+### Tier 3 — trigger event monitoring
+
+- **Google Alerts / Feedly**: trigger keywords ("acquired," "hires," "expansion," "raises," "announces")
+- **PR Newswire / Business Wire**: company-controlled announcements
+- **SEC filings** (public companies): material change disclosures
+- **State filings**: new entity formation, dissolution
+
+---
+
+## Qualification Checklist (B2B branch)
+
+- [ ] Industry / vertical matches ICP (use a recognized classification if possible)
+- [ ] Company size within range (employees or revenue)
+- [ ] Geography fits
+- [ ] At least one trigger event in last 90–180 days
+- [ ] Decision-maker role exists (CEO, COO, VP Operations, Director of X — match buyer profile)
+- [ ] Email contact verifiable (named role > info@ catchall)
+- [ ] Source URLs captured for firmographic claims
+- [ ] No disqualifiers (closed, acquired-paused, multi-bankrupt, off-ICP)
+
+---
+
+## Output Columns (B2B branch)
+
+Recommended CSV columns:
+
+```csv
+score,company,domain,industry,naics_code,size_band,revenue_band,country,city,trigger_event,trigger_date,contact_name,contact_title,contact_email,email_status,linkedin_url,source_urls,why_prospect,confidence,verified_date,notes
+```
+
+For chat table, condense to: Score | Company | Industry | Size | Trigger | Contact | Email status | Confidence.
+
+---
+
+## Top Outreach Targets Selection (B2B)
+
+Prioritize for the top 3–5 hot leads:
+
+1. **Trigger event recency** — 30 days beats 6 months
+2. **Trigger event specificity** — new CMO hire in your buyer's role beats "company in the news"
+3. **Decision-maker access** — named contact with verified email + LinkedIn beats role-only
+4. **Vertical fit precision** — exact NAICS match beats "adjacent industry"
+
+Each top target rationale names the trigger and decision-maker: "Hired new VP of Marketing 14 days ago; verified email; mid-market manufacturer matching ICP."
+
+---
+
+## Common Mistakes (B2B)
+
+1. **Treating B2B like SaaS** — funding rounds matter less; PE ownership and acquisition activity matter more.
+2. **Trying to verify private company revenue precisely** — most public databases approximate. Use size bands, not point estimates.
+3. **Ignoring procurement complexity** at enterprise scale — your prospect contact list may not include the actual approver.
+4. **Cold-emailing executive assistants** — they're not the buyer and they will flag your outreach as spam.
+5. **Source URL hygiene** — without source lineage, you can't defend a contact under GDPR DSAR or CAN-SPAM challenge.
+6. **Stopping at one source** — Apollo can be 60% accurate on small businesses. Cross-verify with LinkedIn or the business website.

shared/skills/prospecting/references/compliance.md

@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+# Prospecting Compliance Reference
+
+The legal and platform-ToS constraints that apply to prospect list building. Read first, every engagement.
+
+> Operational guidance, not legal advice. For high-volume programs or programs touching EU/UK residents, run your setup past a privacy attorney.
+
+---
+
+## United States — CAN-SPAM (downstream)
+
+CAN-SPAM regulates the cold email **send**, not the list build. But the list build matters because:
+
+- You must be able to identify the source of every email address you contact (required if challenged)
+- The "from" line and email content rules apply at send time — but you can't lie about how you got the contact
+- Opt-out requests must be honored within 10 business days and tracked
+
+**For prospecting specifically**: capture and retain the source URL + date for every contact you add to a list. CAN-SPAM doesn't require it explicitly, but defending your sender practices does.
+
+---
+
+## EU / UK — GDPR
+
+The strictest applicable framework. Triggers when:
+
+- Your prospect resides in EU/UK
+- You're processing personal data (any identifiable info, including business emails tied to a named person)
+
+### Lawful bases for cold B2B outreach
+
+You have three credible options:
+
+1. **Legitimate interest** (most common for B2B). Requires:
+   - The contact is in a business role likely to be interested in your offer
+   - The data was collected from a public, business-context source
+   - You provide a clear opt-out
+   - You can articulate the legitimate interest test in writing
+
+2. **Consent** — typically not feasible for cold outreach (you don't have consent before first contact)
+
+3. **Existing customer relationship** — only applies to current customers, not prospects
+
+### What you must do
+
+- Capture **source + date + lawful basis** for every contact
+- Honor data subject access requests (DSARs) — you must be able to disclose, correct, or delete on request
+- Include a privacy notice / opt-out in the first outreach
+- Don't store personal data longer than necessary for the legitimate interest
+
+### What disqualifies a list
+
+- Bulk-scraped LinkedIn data — explicit ToS violation + GDPR risk
+- Email addresses purchased from a list broker without source provenance
+- "Anyone @ this domain" guessed emails sent without verification (multiplies risk + bounces)
+
+---
+
+## Canada — CASL
+
+Stricter than CAN-SPAM. Cold B2B outreach requires:
+
+- **Express consent** (explicit opt-in) — typically not present for cold prospecting
+- **OR implied consent** — existing business relationship within 24 months, OR business address publicly published on the company's own site for the purpose of receiving such communications
+
+**Practical implication for Canadian prospects**: relying on the publicly-published-address exception is the most defensible cold prospecting basis in Canada. You must include sender identification, mailing address, and an unsubscribe mechanism in every message.
+
+---
+
+## Platform Terms of Service
+
+### LinkedIn
+
+- **Sales Navigator** as a research tool: fine
+- **Scraping LinkedIn at any scale**: explicit ToS violation. Banned accounts are permanent. Don't.
+- **Apollo, Clay, and ZoomInfo** claim LinkedIn-overlap data through various legitimate channels — verify their data sources before assuming compliance
+- **InMail and Connection Requests**: governed by LinkedIn's own messaging rules, not by CAN-SPAM/GDPR (because LinkedIn-internal)
+
+### Google Maps
+
+- ToS prohibits bulk extraction or productizing Maps data
+- Browser-assisted research as a discovery aid: acceptable
+- Storing Place IDs or large structured Maps data in your CRM: explicit ToS prohibition
+- Use Maps to **find** local businesses, then cross-source from the business's own site for the data you retain
+
+### Apollo / ZoomInfo / Clearbit
+
+- All have their own ToS limiting reselling, downstream sharing, and use cases
+- Read your contract — typically you can use the data for your own outreach but not productize it
+- Don't share extracts publicly (e.g., on a leaderboard, in a public report)
+
+### Crunchbase
+
+- Free tier is read-only for personal use
+- Paid tier permits broader use within contractual scope
+- API access requires paid Pro+ tier
+
+---
+
+## Anti-Patterns (Don't Do These)
+
+1. **Bulk-scraping LinkedIn / Google Maps / Yelp**. Browser-assisted research is OK; automated scrapers pointed at these platforms are not. **Firecrawl and Browserbase are fine for an individual prospect's own website** (the URL you found through manual discovery) — not for the platforms hosting prospects.
+2. **Buying lists from random vendors** without source provenance. You inherit their legal exposure.
+3. **Guessing emails and sending unverified**. Bounce rates over 2% destroy sender reputation; legally, you can't claim a "legitimate interest" basis for an email you fabricated.
+4. **Harvesting personal email addresses** (Gmail, personal Outlook, etc.) from public profiles. Personal addresses raise GDPR risk significantly.
+5. **Storing data you don't need**. Minimize retention. Don't keep prospect lists forever — GDPR right to deletion applies.
+6. **Skipping the lawful basis documentation**. If challenged, you need to show your work. Capture source URL + collection date for every contact.
+7. **Reselling prospect lists**. You may not have the right to share them downstream. Read your data provider contracts.
+8. **CAPTCHA bypass / login wall bypass**. Even if technically possible, this signals bot behavior and violates virtually every ToS.
+
+---
+
+## Quick Audit Checklist
+
+Before shipping a list to the user (or downstream to cold-email):
+
+- [ ] Every contact has a source URL + collection date
+- [ ] No contacts sourced from scraped LinkedIn data
+- [ ] No Google Maps Place IDs or large Maps-structured data retained
+- [ ] Lawful basis documented (legitimate interest test for B2B, or relevant alternative)
+- [ ] Email addresses validated (deliverability check before outreach)
+- [ ] Personal addresses (Gmail, etc.) flagged or excluded
+- [ ] Source provider contracts permit the intended use case
+- [ ] Retention plan documented (when to delete)
+- [ ] First outreach will include unsubscribe + privacy notice (downstream concern for cold-email skill, but mention it now)

shared/skills/prospecting/references/data-sources.md

@@ -0,0 +1,287 @@
+# Prospecting Data Sources
+
+Tool selection guide for prospecting across all three branches.
+
+---
+
+## Tool selection by goal
+
+| Goal | Primary tools | Notes |
+|------|--------------|-------|
+| **Build initial firmographic list (B2B / SaaS)** | Apollo, ZoomInfo, Clay | Apollo for breadth, ZoomInfo for enterprise + intent, Clay for custom workflows |
+| **Decision-maker mapping** | LinkedIn Sales Navigator (manual), Apollo, ZoomInfo | Sales Nav is the gold standard. Never bulk scrape it. |
+| **Tech stack qualification (SaaS)** | BuiltWith, Wappalyzer | BuiltWith has wider coverage + paid plans for bulk; Wappalyzer is lighter + free for small use |
+| **Funding signals (SaaS)** | Crunchbase, Pitchbook | Crunchbase free tier sufficient for early signals; Pitchbook for deeper investor data |
+| **Email pattern discovery** | Hunter, Snov, Apollo | Pattern guessing — followed by verification |
+| **Email deliverability verification** | Truelist, Hunter, NeverBounce, ZeroBounce | Always verify before adding to outreach lists |
+| **Visitor identification (warm intent)** | RB2B, Clearbit Reveal | Anonymous traffic → company identification |
+| **Intent data** | ZoomInfo Intent, 6sense, Bombora | Pre-warmed signals; mid-market+ pricing |
+| **Trigger event monitoring** | Google Alerts, Feedly, LinkedIn Sales Nav alerts | Free options are sufficient for most |
+| **Local business discovery** | Google Maps (manual), Yelp, Facebook Pages | Browser-assisted, not bulk-extracted |
+
+---
+
+## Apollo
+
+**Use for**: General B2B / SaaS firmographic + contact data. Best starting point if you don't already have a list.
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Large database (>200M contacts, >60M companies)
+- Strong filtering UI (industry, size, technologies, signals)
+- Integrated email + LinkedIn finder
+- Pay-as-you-go and tiered plans
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- Data freshness varies — re-verify before scoring as "Hot"
+- Email accuracy ~60–80% — always validate
+- Bulk export limits apply
+
+**Integration**: see [apollo.md](../../../tools/integrations/apollo.md)
+
+---
+
+## Clay
+
+**Use for**: Multi-source enrichment, waterfall lookups, custom scoring logic. When list quality matters more than list size.
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Waterfall logic: try Apollo first → fallback to ZoomInfo → fallback to Clearbit
+- 100+ data provider integrations
+- AI-powered enrichment (LLM-driven extraction from URLs)
+- Custom columns + scoring formulas
+- Native MCP server
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- Per-credit pricing can spike on large lists
+- Complexity overhead — easy to over-engineer workflows
+
+**Integration**: see [clay.md](../../../tools/integrations/clay.md)
+
+---
+
+## ZoomInfo
+
+**Use for**: Enterprise B2B + intent data. Mid-market+ buyer profiles.
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Enterprise-grade firmographic depth
+- Intent signals (companies searching topics relevant to your offer)
+- Best-in-class for >$50K ACV B2B sales
+- Native MCP server
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- Expensive ($15K+/yr starter)
+- Overkill for SMB prospecting
+- Locked into multi-year contracts typically
+
+**Integration**: see [zoominfo.md](../../../tools/integrations/zoominfo.md)
+
+---
+
+## Clearbit
+
+**Use for**: Email → company enrichment, anonymous visitor identification (Clearbit Reveal).
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Strong company enrichment (industry, size, funding, tech stack)
+- Email lookup by domain
+- Reveal: identify anonymous site visitors at company level
+- API-first
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- HubSpot acquisition (2023) — bundled into HubSpot Breeze Intelligence now
+- Standalone API still available but pricing/access depends on tier
+
+**Integration**: see [clearbit.md](../../../tools/integrations/clearbit.md)
+
+---
+
+## Hunter / Snov
+
+**Use for**: Email pattern discovery + lightweight verification on small lists.
+
+**Hunter strengths**:
+- Domain-based email discovery
+- Built-in deliverability verification
+- Free tier reasonable for occasional use
+
+**Snov strengths**:
+- Email finder + drip campaigns (overlap with outreach tooling)
+- Bulk verification
+- Cheaper than Hunter at scale
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- Both are pattern-guessing tools — accuracy depends on the target company's email pattern being inferable
+- Always run results through a dedicated validator (Truelist or similar) before outreach
+
+**Integrations**: see [hunter.md](../../../tools/integrations/hunter.md), [snov.md](../../../tools/integrations/snov.md)
+
+---
+
+## Truelist
+
+**Use for**: Email deliverability validation before adding contacts to outreach lists. Critical safety step.
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Single-email sync verification (`/api/v1/verify_inline`) + bulk async (`/api/v1/verify`)
+- Returns `email_state` (ok / email_invalid / risky / unknown / accept_all) + `email_sub_state` (email_ok / is_disposable / is_role / unknown_error / failed_smtp_check) + did-you-mean typo suggestions
+- Catches catch-all domains, role accounts, spam traps, disposable providers
+- Official MCP server for agent-driven workflows (Claude, Cursor, VS Code)
+- Official SDKs in 7 languages + framework integrations (Django, Laravel, Next.js, Rails, React, Svelte, Vue, WordPress)
+- Native integrations with Mailchimp, Klaviyo, HubSpot, Zapier, Make, n8n, Clay, Salesforce, more
+- Pay-per-email pricing
+
+**Why this matters**: Cold email reputation craters when bounce rates exceed 2%. Validating before sending is non-negotiable. Apollo/ZoomInfo/Hunter data is often 60–80% accurate — Truelist catches the rest.
+
+**Integration**: see [truelist.md](../../../tools/integrations/truelist.md)
+
+---
+
+## LinkedIn Sales Navigator
+
+**Use for**: Manual decision-maker discovery. The gold standard for B2B / SaaS prospecting but only when used as a research tool.
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Most accurate decision-maker data in the industry
+- Real-time job changes, posts, signals
+- Lead lists, alerts, saved searches
+- Inmail credits (separate channel from cold email)
+
+**Hard rules**:
+- **Never bulk scrape**. LinkedIn aggressively bans scrapers. Account ban risk is real and permanent.
+- Use Sales Nav as a research interface — open profiles, read, take notes, capture key data manually.
+- Apollo and other tools claim LinkedIn data via partnerships / public mirroring — verify the source legitimacy before assuming compliance.
+
+**Integration**: no MCP or API access at consumer level. Manual research only.
+
+---
+
+## BuiltWith / Wappalyzer
+
+**Use for**: Tech stack qualification (SaaS branch).
+
+**BuiltWith**:
+- ~50K+ technologies tracked
+- API + bulk lookups (paid)
+- Historical data (when stack changed)
+
+**Wappalyzer**:
+- Free browser extension; paid API
+- Lighter coverage than BuiltWith
+- Faster for one-off lookups
+
+Cross-reference both for high-confidence tech stack signals.
+
+---
+
+## Crunchbase
+
+**Use for**: Funding signals (SaaS branch).
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Free tier shows recent funding events
+- Paid (Pro / Enterprise) unlocks alerts and deep history
+- API access for paid users
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- Coverage is best for VC-backed companies; bootstrapped + small businesses underrepresented
+- Self-reported data — verify funding amounts independently
+
+---
+
+## GitHub (stargazers / forks / watchers)
+
+**Use for**: Developer-intent prospecting. Especially powerful for dev-tool SaaS — stargazers of competitor or category-defining repos are in-market signal.
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Public API, no scraping concerns
+- High signal quality (a starred repo = explicit interest)
+- Forks are an even stronger signal (intent to modify, not just bookmark)
+- Bundled `github-prospects.js` CLI handles pagination + enrichment + CSV output
+- Free with 5,000 req/hr authenticated rate limit
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- Only ~5–20% of users publish email — pair with Apollo/Clay/Hunter for enrichment
+- Very-popular repos (100K+ stars) are mostly noise; smaller targeted repos (5K–25K) give better signal density
+- Most prospects are individuals, not company contacts directly — need to figure out their company from `company` field or LinkedIn
+
+**Integration**: see [github.md](../../../tools/integrations/github.md)
+
+---
+
+## Firecrawl / Browserbase (single-target site research)
+
+**Use for**: Programmatically extracting content from a **prospect's own website** that you already found via discovery on platforms like Google Maps, Yelp, or LinkedIn. Not for scraping those platforms themselves.
+
+### Firecrawl
+
+- **Best for**: "Just give me the page as markdown" — Local SMB website status checks, B2B company about/team page extraction, structured field extraction
+- **Strengths**: Low overhead, returns clean LLM-ready markdown, handles most JS-rendered sites, has an MCP server
+- **API + MCP + SDKs**: Node, Python, Go, Rust
+
+### Browserbase
+
+- **Best for**: When you need real Chromium — JS-heavy pages, cookie consent dialogs, form submission to reach a contact page, session state
+- **Strengths**: Full browser control via Playwright/Puppeteer; Stagehand provides AI-friendly natural-language extraction; session recordings for debugging
+- **API + MCP (Stagehand) + SDKs**: Node, Python
+
+### Critical compliance line
+
+Both tools can technically point at any URL. The hard rule:
+
+- ✓ **OK**: extracting content from a single business's own website (`joescoffeeshop.com`) that you found through manual discovery
+- ✗ **NOT OK**: pointing them at `google.com/maps`, LinkedIn search results, Yelp listings, or any platform whose ToS prohibits bulk extraction
+
+Discovery happens on platforms (manual browser-assisted research). Extraction happens on individual public business sites.
+
+**Integrations**: see [firecrawl.md](../../../tools/integrations/firecrawl.md), [browserbase.md](../../../tools/integrations/browserbase.md)
+
+---
+
+## RB2B / Clearbit Reveal
+
+**Use for**: Identifying anonymous site visitors as warm intent signals.
+
+**Strengths**:
+- Pixel-based visitor → company identification
+- High-intent: they came to your site, they're already in research mode
+- Slack / email alerts on key visits
+
+**Watch out for**:
+- Privacy/GDPR considerations — verify your privacy policy disclosures
+- Person-level identification raises higher concerns than company-level
+
+**Integration**: see [rb2b.md](../../../tools/integrations/rb2b.md)
+
+---
+
+## Free / browser-only fallbacks
+
+When the user has no paid tools, lean on:
+
+- **Google Search** — exact business name + city + role searches
+- **LinkedIn** (manual, no scraping) — company pages, employee lookups
+- **Crunchbase free tier** — funding events
+- **Wappalyzer browser extension** — tech stack at a glance
+- **Hunter.io free tier** — 25 lookups/month
+- **Google Maps** — for Local SMB discovery
+- **Business websites + About pages** — primary source for any claim
+- **News sites + press releases** — trigger event monitoring via Google Alerts
+
+Slower than tooled-up workflows, but produces high-quality smaller lists if the user is willing to do the work.
+
+---
+
+## Sequencing recommendations
+
+A typical full-stack prospecting workflow:
+
+1. **Define ICP** from product-marketing context (no tools needed)
+2. **Initial list** from Apollo or ZoomInfo (firmographic filter)
+3. **Enrich** with Clay (waterfall: tech stack, funding, trigger events)
+4. **Decision-maker mapping** in LinkedIn Sales Nav (manual)
+5. **Email pattern discovery** with Hunter or Apollo's built-in
+6. **Email validation** with Truelist before final list
+7. **Hand off** to cold-email skill for outreach copy
+
+Adapt this sequence based on which tools the user actually has.

shared/skills/prospecting/references/demand-signals.md

@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
+# Demand-Signal Discovery (Find Your First Customers)
+
+The other three branches build a list from who *fits* (firmographics, technographics, proximity). This branch builds a list from who is *already showing the pain* — the early-stage motion where you have a product and a hunch but no customer base yet, and you need your first ten real conversations. You are not filtering a database; you are mining recent public discourse for people describing the exact problem you solve, then linking every prospect to the evidence.
+
+Use this branch when the user is pre-product-market-fit, launching something new, or looking for **design partners, beta users, or first customers** rather than a scaled outbound list. It reuses the shared five phases and every compliance guardrail in SKILL.md; what changes is where you look, how you score, and what you ship.
+
+Pattern credit: the framework here is re-expressed from the open-source `first-customer-finder` Codex skill (Kappaemme, MIT), extended with our live-recency tooling.
+
+## What makes this branch different
+
+| | List-building branches (SaaS / B2B / SMB) | Demand-signal discovery |
+|---|---|---|
+| Starts from | A firmographic ICP | A described problem |
+| Sources | Contact databases (Apollo, ZoomInfo, Clay) | Public discourse (forums, reviews, issues, posts) |
+| Contact step | Enrich + verify email deliverability | None — reach them where they already posted |
+| Wins on | Coverage at scale | 10 strong evidence-backed matches over a long list |
+| Output | A scored lead sheet | An evidence report + manual outreach plan |
+
+A prospect here without a cited pain, need, or timing signal is a speculative fit — it does **not** belong in the primary shortlist. Evidence is the entry ticket.
+
+## Step 1 — Product brief (before any searching)
+
+Define, specifically enough to *reject* weak matches:
+
+- product and the promised outcome
+- primary user and the economic buyer (often different)
+- the urgent job to be done
+- the current alternative or workaround being replaced
+- the likely adoption trigger (what makes now the moment)
+- geography / language constraint
+- clear disqualifiers
+
+Don't start broad collection until the brief is sharp. Pull from `.agents/product-marketing.md` if it exists.
+
+## Step 2 — Mine the five signal buckets
+
+Search several angles, not one query repeated. Adapt wording to how the audience actually talks (mine their vocabulary from organic content first — see the ad-creative hook-system's organic-language note for the same idea).
+
+1. **Explicit demand** — "looking for," "recommend a tool for," "alternative to [X]," "does anything exist that," "how do you all handle."
+2. **Pain** — "takes hours," "so manual," "hate that," "keeps breaking," "biggest frustration with," "why is there no."
+3. **Workaround** — spreadsheets, copy-paste, a VA, a Zapier chain, a script, a template, any repeated manual step that your product would replace.
+4. **Switching** — cancellation, migration, "moving off [competitor]," a missing feature, a pricing complaint, competitor frustration.
+5. **Timing** — a public launch, a new hire for the relevant function, expansion, a new workflow or regulation, an integration announcement — a *current* event that makes the product relevant now.
+
+**Use our live-recency edge.** A generic skill relies on whatever a web search surfaces; you have better:
+- **last30days** — Reddit, Hacker News, X, YouTube, and web signals from the last 30 days. This is the single highest-value tool for this branch: recency *is* the timing signal.
+- **social-fetch** — pull the full content of a specific post/thread you find, normalized.
+- **scraping** / **Firecrawl** / **Browserbase** — read the original public page (a forum thread, a GitHub issue, a review), never qualify from a search snippet alone.
+- **deep-research** — for a multi-source sweep with adversarial verification when the wedge is broad.
+- **competitor-profiling** / **customer-research** — competitor switching signals and review-mining for the pain language.
+
+## Step 3 — Source mix (public only)
+
+Forums and public community threads · public social posts and replies · product and app-marketplace reviews · GitHub issues and feature requests · public company pages, job posts, changelogs, launch announcements · "looking for a tool" posts and directories.
+
+Avoid private groups, gated communities, data brokers, leaked datasets, and any source whose terms prohibit access — the same compliance guardrails as every other branch (see SKILL.md), including the no-sensitive-traits rule.
+
+**Business/professional context only.** Qualify and reach out only where someone is posting in a professional or business capacity about a work problem (a founder in an indie-hackers thread, a developer in a GitHub issue, an ops lead in a subreddit for their role). Exclude personal-distress contexts entirely — health, financial hardship, addiction, grief, or any consumer support forum where people are venting personal problems, even if your product is tangentially relevant. When the motion is genuinely consumer (B2C), a public pain post is not on its own a lawful basis for cold outreach — reach people through the channel's own norms (reply publicly where replying is expected) and never DM a stranger off a personal post.
+
+Quote minimally, paraphrase by default, and link every material pain or timing signal.
+
+## Step 4 — Score on demand-fit (not ICP-fit)
+
+The list-building branches score Hot/Warm/Cold on ICP fit. This branch scores 0–100 on **demand fit** — how strongly the evidence says this specific prospect wants this specific thing now. Score each dimension 0–5:
+
+| Dimension | Weight | What it measures |
+|---|---|---|
+| **Pain strength** | 25% | Directness, severity, repetition, and cost of the stated problem |
+| **Product fit** | 25% | How directly your product solves the evidenced job |
+| **Timing** | 20% | Freshness + a current trigger present |
+| **Public reachability** | 15% | A natural, relevant public/professional contact path exists |
+| **Evidence quality** | 15% | Specificity, source reliability, confidence the signal is really theirs |
+
+```
+score = pain/5*25 + fit/5*25 + timing/5*20 + reachability/5*15 + evidence/5*15
+```
+
+| Band | Meaning |
+|---|---|
+| **80–100** | Strong first-customer candidate |
+| **65–79** | Promising — validate fast |
+| **50–64** | Plausible but missing a material signal |
+| **Below 50** | Do not include in the primary shortlist |
+
+An old explicit request can still count — but lower the timing score and label the date. A company that merely matches the industry with no evidenced trigger is *not* a qualified prospect here.
+
+### Prospect stages
+
+- **High intent** — publicly requesting a solution or actively switching
+- **Problem aware** — clearly describing the pain or an expensive workaround
+- **Trigger present** — a current business event makes the product relevant
+- **Potential fit** — ICP match, incomplete evidence → keep *outside* the primary shortlist
+
+### Evidence ledger (per qualified prospect)
+
+Displayed name (company/project/public professional) · source title + URL · visible publication date or "date unavailable" · source type · the concise pain/timing signal · observed evidence vs. inference (label which) · score breakdown · freshness warning when the signal is stale.
+
+## Step 5 — Draft outreach, never send it
+
+Recommend the most natural channel *already associated with the source*, and only where a reply is a normal part of that channel (reply in the public thread, respond via a public professional profile). Don't turn a public post into a private DM the poster didn't invite, and never contact someone off a personal-distress post. Draft one opener, under ~90 words, in this shape:
+
+1. mention the public context naturally
+2. connect it to the exact problem
+3. explain the product in one sentence
+4. ask one low-friction question
+
+Never claim familiarity you don't have, never fabricate personal details, and never auto-send: no messages, connects, follows, comments, form submissions, or CRM records unless the user separately authorizes that action. This is the manual/gated posture from the marketing-loops guardrails.
+
+## Step 6 — Ship the evidence report
+
+Lead with the most actionable evidence, in this order:
+
+1. **Verdict** — does the product have reachable early-customer signal, or not yet? (An honest "not yet, here's why" is a valid answer.)
+2. **ICP** — buyer, job, trigger, disqualifiers.
+3. **Top prospect** — the single strongest evidence-backed candidate and why now.
+4. **Prospect shortlist** — per prospect: source, pain signal, demand-fit score, stage, why-now, channel, opener.
+5. **Repeated patterns** — pains and triggers recurring across prospects (these are your positioning and messaging gold).
+6. **Seven-day manual outreach plan** — a low-volume validation sequence (e.g., contact the top 3 with one source-based question; share a mockup only after they confirm the pain; target three conversations and one design-partner commitment).
+7. **Limits** — what evidence is missing and what must be confirmed through real conversations.
+
+For a shareable standalone HTML version of this report, the JSON→HTML generator pattern in ad-creative's [creative-review-page.md](../../ad-creative/references/creative-review-page.md) is the model (escape every value; keep it self-contained).
+
+## The honesty rules (non-negotiable)
+
+- Every primary prospect links to at least one real public signal. No signal, no shortlist.
+- Label the output **"potential customer based on public signals"** — never "interested," "will buy," or "has consented."
+- Prefer ten strong matches over a long generic list. Make uncertainty and stale evidence visible.
+- Personalize from the cited source, not from invented assumptions.
+- Treat the shortlist as a research hypothesis to validate through conversations, not a customer database.

shared/skills/prospecting/references/local-prospecting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,165 @@
+# Local SMB Prospecting Reference
+
+For when the user sells to local small businesses — shops, gyms, restaurants, salons, clinics, professional services, contractors, real estate, fitness studios, dental practices.
+
+Adapted from and generalized beyond the local-client-prospector pattern (browser-assisted discovery + website status classification + proximity scoring).
+
+---
+
+## ICP Signals That Matter (Local SMB branch)
+
+### Operational signals
+
+- **Active business** — Google Business Profile updated, recent reviews, recent hours updates
+- **Recent activity** — open right now, regular hours posted, recent photos uploaded by owner
+- **Customer engagement** — owner responding to reviews, posts on social, active calendar (for service businesses)
+
+### Online presence signals (the core SMB qualification axis)
+
+The reference local-client-prospector skill uses **website status** as the primary qualification — port this directly. Four classifications:
+
+| Status | Definition | Typical outcome |
+|--------|-----------|-----------------|
+| **No site found** | No credible standalone website after cross-checked search | **Hot prospect** for web/marketing service |
+| **Social only** | Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Linktree, booking portal, marketplace page only — no standalone site | **Hot prospect** for web/marketing service |
+| **Weak site** | Standalone site exists but outdated, broken, very thin, non-mobile-friendly, or missing clear contact/conversion flow | **Warm prospect** for refresh / rebuild service |
+| **Has site** | Credible, modern standalone site exists | **Low prospect** unless other signals apply (e.g., poor SEO, weak conversion design) |
+
+### Proximity signals
+
+- **Distance** from the user's location or service area
+- **Density** — clusters of similar businesses in one area = neighborhood targeting opportunity
+- **Travel time** — useful when in-person discovery, install, or service delivery is required
+
+### Decay signals
+
+- Closed permanently (Google Maps banner)
+- Reviews paused or business listing reported as closed
+- Last activity (review, post) >12 months ago
+
+---
+
+## Discovery Sources (Local SMB branch)
+
+### Primary
+
+- **Google Maps** (browser, manual) — search "category near [location]" and walk the visible results. Cross-check details. Don't bulk-extract.
+- **Yelp** — secondary verification; complementary categories
+- **Bing Local / Apple Maps** — different coverage on smaller businesses
+- **Facebook Pages search** — many SMBs are Facebook-only
+
+### Cross-verification
+
+- **Business's own website** (if any)
+- **Industry directories** (e.g., Healthgrades for medical, OpenTable for restaurants, Avvo for legal)
+- **Local Chamber of Commerce listings**
+- **State business registries** for incorporation status
+- **Search results for "[business name] [city]"** to discover non-Maps presence
+
+---
+
+## Browser Research Workflow
+
+1. Open a browser and search Google Maps for the category near `base_location`
+2. Build a candidate list from visible local results, search results, and public directories
+3. For each candidate, inspect public sources to fill required fields
+4. Search the exact business name plus city/town to check whether a standalone website exists
+5. Classify website status per the table above
+6. Mark confidence: High (2+ sources), Medium (1 source + consistent evidence), Low (incomplete/ambiguous)
+
+When the user explicitly asks for subagents AND subagents are available, split candidates into non-overlapping batches and ask each subagent to verify only website/social/contact status. Don't use subagents for the primary search if it slows progress.
+
+### Optional: programmatic verification with Firecrawl or Browserbase
+
+Once you have a candidate's website URL (found via manual Maps/Yelp discovery), you can speed up website-status classification by hitting the URL programmatically:
+
+- **Firecrawl** for simple "is this site live, modern, mobile-friendly, conversion-flow-equipped" reads — returns clean markdown you can inspect
+- **Browserbase** when the candidate site requires JS rendering, has a cookie consent dialog, or you need session state
+
+**Strict line**: use these on the individual business's URL. **Don't** point them at Google Maps, Yelp, or any platform whose ToS prohibits bulk extraction — discovery stays manual.
+
+See [data-sources.md](data-sources.md) for setup details.
+
+---
+
+## Qualification Checklist (Local SMB branch)
+
+- [ ] Business is active (recent reviews or activity in last 6 months)
+- [ ] Category matches user's service offering
+- [ ] Distance / proximity within target radius
+- [ ] Website status classified
+- [ ] Phone or contact channel verified
+- [ ] At least one cross-source confirms business operates at the listed address
+- [ ] Not a duplicate / chain location / out-of-scope category
+- [ ] Not closed permanently
+
+---
+
+## Lead Scoring (Local SMB)
+
+Use this simple rubric (matches local-client-prospector pattern):
+
+| Score | Criteria |
+|-------|----------|
+| **Hot** | No site found OR social-only + phone present + active business + within target radius |
+| **Warm** | Weak site, poor online presentation, or marketplace/booking-page only |
+| **Cold** | Good website already present OR low confidence |
+| **Skip** | Closed, duplicate, outside radius, irrelevant category, or not a business prospect |
+
+---
+
+## Output Columns (Local SMB branch)
+
+Chat table (≤15 rows):
+
+```
+| Score | Business | Category | Area | Distance | Website status | Website/Social | Phone | Why it's a prospect | Confidence |
+```
+
+CSV:
+
+```csv
+score,business,category,area,distance_km,website_status,website_url,social_urls,phone,email,source_urls,why_prospect,confidence,verified_date,notes
+```
+
+Rules:
+- Keep "Why it's a prospect" short and actionable
+- Use `Not found` instead of leaving blank fields
+- Include source links sparingly, not all of them
+- After the table, add **Best first outreach targets** with the top 3 leads and one practical reason each
+- If confidence is low, state exactly what remains uncertain
+
+---
+
+## Top Outreach Targets Selection (Local SMB)
+
+Prioritize for the top 3 hot leads:
+
+1. **No site / social only + phone present** = clearest service opportunity
+2. **High review count** = active, established business with real customers
+3. **Owner-responded reviews** = engaged owner = more likely to evaluate a vendor
+4. **Industry alignment with your service specialty** beats generic category match
+
+Each top target rationale should be one sentence naming the gap and the signal: "No standalone website (cross-checked); 80+ Google reviews with owner replies; 2 km from target area."
+
+---
+
+## Compliance Notes (Local SMB-specific)
+
+The local branch is the most scraping-sensitive of the three motions. Specifically:
+
+- **Google Maps Terms of Service** prohibit bulk extraction. Treat browser visits as research, not as data acquisition.
+- **Don't store full Google Maps Place IDs in your CRM** — the ToS limits storage of Maps data.
+- **Public business contact channels only**: published phone, contact form, info@ email. Don't reach individual employees through their personal channels.
+- **Owner/operator name when published on the business's own site** is OK to use. If you only got it from LinkedIn, mark the source.
+
+---
+
+## Common Mistakes (Local SMB)
+
+1. **Bulk-scraping Google Maps** — fastest way to violate ToS and lose the research channel.
+2. **Treating Google Maps data as truth** — listings go stale. Cross-check hours, status, and reviews.
+3. **Skipping the website status cross-check** — finding "no site" on Maps doesn't mean no site exists; do an exact-name web search before classifying.
+4. **Targeting only the largest businesses** — they're already covered by other providers. The 2–5 employee SMBs are the under-served opportunity.
+5. **Generic outreach to all hot leads** — local SMBs respond better to outreach that names their specific gap ("I noticed your menu isn't visible on mobile") than generic pitches.
+6. **Ignoring chains and franchises** as Skip — sometimes the franchisee is the buyer and they have local marketing authority. Verify before skipping.

shared/skills/prospecting/references/saas-prospecting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+# SaaS Prospecting Reference
+
+For when the user sells SaaS or digital services to other SaaS companies / digital businesses.
+
+---
+
+## ICP Signals That Matter (SaaS branch)
+
+Beyond standard firmographics (industry, size, geography), SaaS prospects are qualified by:
+
+### Technographic signals
+
+- **Tech stack** — do they use complementary tools (your integration target) or competing tools (a switch opportunity)?
+- **Recent stack changes** — adding/removing tools signals active vendor evaluation
+- **Custom-built vs off-the-shelf** — DIY tooling often means a buyer who'd benefit from your product
+- **Free/freemium plan signals** — using a free competitor means they may be ready to upgrade
+
+### Growth signals
+
+- **Funding round** — Series A / B / C in last 6 months = budget + new hires + tool needs
+- **Headcount growth** — 10%+ growth in last quarter signals scaling pressure
+- **Hiring signals** — specific role openings (e.g., "Head of RevOps" → ICP for revops tooling)
+- **Product velocity** — frequent shipping, new features, blog posts = healthy growth motion
+- **Open positions for your buyer's role** — if you sell to Marketing Ops and they're hiring one, that's a signal
+
+### Decay signals (downgrade scoring)
+
+- Layoffs in target department
+- Funding round >2 years ago with no follow-up
+- Product hasn't shipped in 6+ months
+- Team page shows founders only (very early — may not have budget)
+
+---
+
+## Discovery Sources (SaaS branch)
+
+Combine 2+ sources for cross-verification.
+
+### Tier 1 — primary discovery
+
+- **Apollo**: firmographic + technographic + contact data. Good for building large initial lists.
+- **Clay**: waterfall enrichment, custom scoring, multi-source merges. Best for high-quality smaller lists.
+- **ZoomInfo**: enterprise-grade firmographic + intent signals. Expensive; mid-market+.
+- **LinkedIn Sales Navigator**: decision-maker mapping. Use manually, never bulk scrape.
+
+### Tier 2 — technographic / growth signals
+
+- **BuiltWith**: tech stack lookups, find sites using specific tools
+- **Wappalyzer**: free browser extension + API; lighter tech stack signal
+- **Crunchbase**: funding rounds, headcount, founders
+- **Pitchbook**: deeper investor data (enterprise/paid)
+- **ProductHunt**: recent launches, builder audience
+- **Hacker News / Show HN**: technical builders launching products
+
+### Tier 3 — buying signals
+
+- **Job boards** (LinkedIn Jobs, Indeed, AngelList): role openings as signals
+- **RB2B / Clearbit Reveal**: visitor identification (warm anonymous traffic)
+- **GitHub stars/forks of competitor or adjacent repos**: developer-level intent signal (see `tools/integrations/github.md` and the `github-prospects.js` CLI). Especially strong for dev-tool SaaS — a developer who starred `vercel/next.js` last week is in-market for adjacent Next.js infrastructure.
+- **Recent blog posts / changelog**: product direction signals
+- **G2 reviews mentioning competitor switches**: explicit dissatisfaction signal
+
+#### GitHub prospecting pattern (when audience is developers)
+
+For dev-tool SaaS, GitHub is one of the highest-quality discovery channels:
+
+1. Identify 3–5 "anchor" repos: your direct competitors, your category leader, complementary tools your buyer uses
+2. Pull stargazers (or forks for stronger intent) via `node tools/clis/github-prospects.js stargazers <owner/repo> --enrich --with-company --format csv`
+3. Filter to users with `company` set — these are the easiest to enrich downstream
+4. Pair with Apollo/Clay/Hunter to lookup email by name + company
+5. Validate with Truelist before adding to outreach list
+
+Tradeoffs: GitHub yields email for only ~5–20% of users directly. The strength is the signal quality — a stargazer of a niche dev tool is genuinely in-market in a way Apollo firmographics alone can't tell you.
+
+---
+
+## Qualification Checklist (SaaS branch)
+
+For each candidate, verify:
+
+- [ ] Industry vertical matches ICP
+- [ ] Company size (headcount) within range
+- [ ] Tech stack includes (or notably excludes) a target technology
+- [ ] Funding stage matches buyer maturity
+- [ ] At least one growth signal in last 90 days (funding, hiring, product velocity)
+- [ ] Decision-maker role exists at the company (named or inferable from job listings)
+- [ ] Email contact verifiable
+- [ ] No disqualifiers (closed, acquired-and-paused, layoffs, ICP miss)
+
+---
+
+## Output Columns (SaaS branch)
+
+Recommended CSV columns:
+
+```csv
+score,company,domain,industry,size_band,country,funding_stage,last_round_date,tech_stack_match,signal,signal_date,contact_name,contact_title,contact_email,email_status,linkedin_url,source_urls,why_prospect,confidence,verified_date,notes
+```
+
+For chat table, condense to: Score | Company | Industry | Size | Signal | Contact | Email status | Confidence.
+
+---
+
+## Top Outreach Targets Selection (SaaS)
+
+Prioritize for the top 3–5 hot leads:
+
+1. **Strongest signal recency** — funding 30 days ago beats funding 9 months ago
+2. **Tech stack match strength** — known integration partner beats inferred fit
+3. **Decision-maker named with verified email** — beats role-pattern-guessed email
+4. **Multi-source confidence** — both Apollo + Crunchbase agree beats one source
+
+Each top target gets a one-sentence outreach rationale that names the specific signal: "Raised Series B 30 days ago; hiring Head of RevOps; verified VP of Ops email."
+
+---
+
+## Common Mistakes (SaaS)
+
+1. **Buying lists from Apollo wholesale** without re-verifying email and re-checking firmographics. Stale data is the norm.
+2. **Treating tech stack data as 100% accurate**. BuiltWith and Wappalyzer miss things; Clay's waterfalls miss things. Cross-check.
+3. **Targeting Series C+ for early-stage SaaS sellers**. The buyer profile is wrong — too many procurement hoops, too much red tape.
+4. **Targeting Series Pre-Seed seed** for products requiring meaningful budget. They have neither budget nor evaluator bandwidth.
+5. **Ignoring intent data when it exists** (ZoomInfo Intent, 6sense, etc.) — pre-warm signals beat cold every time.