Use this skill when the user needs market evidence, not just opinions. It should activate for market sizing, opportunity validation, competitor landscape work, segment selection, pricing research, whitespace mapping, and expansion decisions.
This skill is especially useful when the user asks "is this market worth entering?", "how big is the real opportunity?", "who else is already winning here?", or "what evidence would reduce risk before we build, launch, or invest more time?"
Use the smallest relevant file for the task.
TopicFileCompetitor landscape and gap frameworkscompetitor-analysis.mdCustomer validation and pricing methodsvalidation.mdEvidence quality and confidence rubricevidence-grading.md
Start every serious engagement with a compact brief like this:
text
MARKET RESEARCH BRIEF
Decision:
Target customer:
Geography:
Category or substitute set:
Time horizon:
Must-answer questions:
Evidence bar:
If the brief is weak, the research will drift. Tight questions produce better markets, better comparisons, and better recommendations.
Pick the lightest mode that still answers the decision well. Depth should follow the decision, not ego.
ModeBest ForMinimum OutputQuick scanEarly idea filteringMarket snapshot, top competitors, 2-3 key risksDecision memoFounders, operators, or investors making a next-step callSizing view, segment map, competitor comparison, recommendationLaunch validationNew product, feature, or niche entryDemand signals, pricing checks, interview findings, no-go risksExpansion studyNew geography, segment, or adjacent categorySAM filters, local competitors, channel constraints, rollout logic
Always anchor the work to one decision:
Research without a decision target becomes a document full of facts and no leverage.
Never stop at a single big number. Separate:
LayerQuestionFailure ModeTAMHow large is the broad category?Sounds exciting but too abstractSAMWhich part is actually reachable for this product and customer?Overstates opportunitySOMWhat can realistically be won in a specific window?Turns fantasy into planning
Whenever possible, show the formula, assumptions, and confidence level. A smaller defensible number is better than a huge vague one.
Use at least three evidence families before making a strong claim:
See evidence-grading.md for the confidence ladder. If all evidence comes from one source type, the conclusion is still fragile.
Do not treat "the market" as one blob. Split by:
Many bad conclusions come from averaging together segments that behave very differently.
Competitor analysis includes:
Use competitor-analysis.md to build a positioning map, review-mining matrix, and whitespace view. The real competitor is whatever the customer would choose instead of the proposed offer.
Use interviews and surveys to learn language and patterns, but trust behavior more than compliments.
Strong signals:
Weak signals:
See validation.md for interview, survey, and pricing research structures.
Every deliverable should end with:
text
RECOMMENDATION
- What the evidence supports
- What remains uncertain
- What should happen next
- What would change the recommendation
Good market research reduces uncertainty. Great market research makes the next move obvious.
This skill does NOT:
Live web research is appropriate only when the task requires current market data or the user asks for external evidence.
Install with clawhub install <slug> if user confirms:
pricing - Convert validation findings into pricing strategy and willingness-to-pay decisions.seo - Translate validated demand into search-driven positioning and content opportunities.business - Connect market findings to strategic choices and operating tradeoffs.compare - Structure side-by-side option analysis when multiple markets or segments compete.data-analysis - Turn collected numbers into cleaner interpretation and supporting visuals.clawhub star market-researchclawhub sync