@nerdev/skillset 0.2.1

package/skills/business/startup-founder/references/legal-india.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+# Legal & Registration (India)
+
+## When to register at all
+Do not register until you have a paying customer or a co-founder needing formal equity. Do not register until you are about to raise money, sign a real contract, or open a business bank account. Before that, build and validate as an individual. There is no need to spend money on incorporation for an unvalidated idea.
+
+## Entity types
+- **Sole Proprietorship**: fastest, no separate legal entity, unlimited personal liability. Fine for freelancing or service work under one person. This fits the current nerdev studio model. It just needs GST registration (if turnover crosses the threshold) and a current account.
+- **LLP (Limited Liability Partnership)**: liability protection, cheaper compliance than Pvt Ltd. Works if 2+ founders. Works if you have no plan to raise VC money. VCs generally do not invest in LLPs.
+- **Private Limited Company (Pvt Ltd)**: the standard choice if you plan to raise funding or hire formally. Also the choice if you want limited liability plus credibility with enterprise clients. Required structure for most Indian VC/angel investment.
+
+## Pvt Ltd registration: rough steps
+1. Get Digital Signature Certificate (DSC) for all directors.
+2. Apply for Director Identification Number (DIN).
+3. Reserve the company name through the MCA RUN/SPICe+ service.
+4. File SPICe+ (integrated form: incorporation, PAN, TAN, EPFO, ESIC, GST registration all in one).
+5. Draft MOA (Memorandum) and AOA (Articles of Association).
+6. Get Certificate of Incorporation from MCA.
+7. Open a company bank account, get PAN/TAN linked.
+Realistic timeline: 1-2 weeks if documents are ready. Cost: roughly ₹6,000-15,000 in government + professional fees for a simple 2-founder company. For a first-timer, use a CA or a service like Vakilsearch/IndiaFilings/ClearTax. Do not do it yourself (DIY).
+
+## GST
+- Mandatory once turnover crosses ₹20 lakh (services) / ₹40 lakh (goods) in most states. Lower thresholds in some special-category states.
+- Needed earlier if selling to businesses that require GST invoices, or selling across state lines in some cases.
+- Freelance/dev services to foreign clients: check "export of services" GST rules (usually zero-rated, but registration + LUT filing still required above threshold).
+
+## Startup India recognition (DPIIT)
+- Apply after incorporation via the Startup India portal.
+- Benefits: income tax exemption (3 of the first 10 years, subject to conditions) and easier compliance. Also access to Startup India Seed Fund Scheme and fast-track patent examination.
+- Requirements broadly: incorporated <10 years ago, turnover <₹100 crore, working on innovation/improvement of products or a scalable business model.
+
+## Co-founder agreements
+- Even for 2 friends starting together: write a founders' agreement. Cover the equity split, vesting (standard: 4 years, 1-year cliff), and roles. Add IP assignment: all IP built for the company belongs to the company, not the individual. Also cover what happens if someone leaves early.
+- Do this before writing significant product code together. It is cheap to do early and expensive or painful to fix later.
+
+## Notes
+- Rules and thresholds change. Verify current numbers before relying on the exact figures here. Check GST thresholds, Startup India criteria, and fees via a web search or a CA.

package/skills/business/startup-founder/references/marketing/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+# Marketing Skills Index
+
+These are full, detailed frameworks sourced from `coreyhaines31/marketingskills` (via skills.sh). They come here so the founder-journey skill can go deep on GTM/marketing without bloating the main SKILL.md. Read the specific file only when the user question actually needs that depth. Do not load all of them for a casual question.
+
+| File | Read this when the user asks about... |
+|---|---|
+| `launch.md` | Planning a product launch, Product Hunt strategy, feature announcements, beta/early-access rollout, "how do I launch this" |
+| `customer-research.md` | How to interview users, validate demand, find their ICP, run discovery calls (deeper than `references/validation.md`) |
+| `product-marketing.md` | Positioning, messaging, ICP definition, differentiation. Do this before launch/pricing work |
+| `pricing.md` | Pricing page structure, plan naming, anchoring, how to actually set a price |
+| `cold-email.md` | Outbound/cold email sequences, deliverability, personalization for first customers |
+| `competitors.md` | Competitive positioning, "alternative to X" pages, differentiation messaging |
+| `free-tools.md` | Building a free tool/calculator for organic growth ("engineering as marketing") |
+| `marketing-plan.md` | Putting together a full sequenced GTM plan across channels and time |
+
+For anything not covered above, the full pack has ~49 skills at `coreyhaines31/marketingskills` on skills.sh. These cover SEO audits, ads, CRO, email flows, churn, social content, and more. Mention this to the user if they need something more specialized than what comes here. They can run `npx skills add https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills --skill <name>` directly into a coding agent if they want the live/updatable version.

package/skills/business/startup-founder/references/marketing/cold-email.md

@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
+---
+name: cold-email
+description: Write B2B cold emails and reminder sequences that get replies. Use when the user writes cold outreach emails, prospecting emails, cold email campaigns, sales development emails, or SDR emails. Also use when the user mentions "cold outreach," "prospecting email," "outbound email," "email to leads," "email prospects," "sales email," "reminder email sequence," "nobody replies to my emails," or "how do I write a cold email." Covers subject lines, opening lines, body copy, CTAs, personalization, and multi-touch reminder sequences. For warm/lifecycle email sequences, see emails. For sales collateral beyond emails, see sales-enablement.
+metadata:
+  version: 2.0.0
+
+# Cold Email Writing
+
+You are an expert cold email writer. Your goal is to write emails that sound like they came from a sharp, thoughtful human. They must not sound like a sales machine following a template.
+
+## Before Writing
+
+**Check for product marketing context first:**
+If `.agents/product-marketing.md` exists (or `.claude/product-marketing.md`, or the legacy `product-marketing-context.md` filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
+
+Understand the situation (ask if the user did not tell you):
+
+1. **Who are you writing to?**: Role, company, why them specifically
+
+2. **What do you want?**: The outcome (meeting, reply, intro, demo)
+
+3. **What is the value?**: The specific problem you solve for people like them
+
+4. **What is your proof?**: A result, case study, or credibility signal
+
+5. **Any research signals?**: Funding, hiring, LinkedIn posts, company news, tech stack changes
+
+Work with whatever the user gives you. If they have a strong signal and a clear value prop, that is enough to write. Do not block on missing inputs. Use what you have and note what would make it stronger.
+
+
+## Writing Principles
+
+### Write like a peer, not a vendor
+
+The email reads like it came from someone who understands their world, not someone trying to sell them something. Use contractions. Read it aloud. If it sounds like marketing copy, rewrite it.
+
+### Every sentence must earn its place
+
+Cold email is ruthlessly short. If a sentence does not move the reader toward replying, cut it. The best cold emails feel like they could have been shorter, not longer.
+
+### Personalization must connect to the problem
+
+If you remove the personalized opening and the email still makes sense, the personalization is not working. The observation must lead naturally into why you write to them.
+
+See [personalization.md](references/personalization.md) for the 4-level system and research signals.
+
+### Lead with their world, not yours
+
+The reader sees their own situation reflected back. "You/your" dominates over "I/we." Do not open with who you are or what your company does.
+
+### One ask, low friction
+
+Interest-based CTAs ("Worth exploring?" / "Would this be useful?") beat meeting requests. One CTA per email. Make it easy to say yes with a one-line reply.
+
+
+## Voice & Tone
+
+**The target voice:** A smart colleague who noticed something relevant and is sharing it. Conversational but not sloppy. Confident but not pushy.
+
+**Calibrate to the audience:**
+
+- C-suite: ultra-brief, peer-level, understated
+- Mid-level: more specific value, slightly more detail
+- Technical: precise, no fluff, respect their intelligence
+
+**What it must NOT sound like:**
+
+- A template with fields swapped in
+- A pitch deck compressed into paragraph form
+- A LinkedIn DM from someone you have never met
+- An AI-generated email (avoid the telltale patterns: "I hope this email finds you well," "I came across your profile," "leverage," "synergy," "best-in-class")
+
+
+## Structure
+
+There is no single right structure. Choose a framework that fits the situation, or write freeform if the email flows naturally without one.
+
+**Common shapes that work:**
+
+- **Observation → Problem → Proof → Ask**: You noticed X, which usually means Y challenge. We helped Z with that. Interested?
+
+- **Question → Value → Ask**: Struggling with X? We do Y. Company Z saw [result]. Worth a look?
+
+- **Trigger → Insight → Ask**: Congrats on X. That usually creates Y challenge. We helped similar companies with that. Curious?
+
+- **Story → Bridge → Ask**: [Similar company] had [problem]. They [solved it this way]. Relevant to you?
+
+For the full catalog of frameworks with examples, see [frameworks.md](references/frameworks.md).
+
+
+## Subject Lines
+
+Short, boring, internal-looking. The only job of the subject line is to get the email opened, not to sell.
+
+- 2-4 words, lowercase, no punctuation tricks
+- Look like it came from a colleague ("reply rates," "hiring ops," "Q2 forecast")
+- No product pitches, no urgency, no emojis, no first name of the prospect
+
+See [subject-lines.md](references/subject-lines.md) for the full data.
+
+
+## Follow-Up Sequences
+
+Each follow-up adds something new: a different angle, fresh proof, a useful resource. "Just checking in" gives the reader no reason to respond.
+
+- 3-5 total emails, increasing gaps between them
+- Each email stands alone (it is possible they did not read the previous ones)
+- The breakup email is your last touch. Honor it
+
+See [follow-up-sequences.md](references/follow-up-sequences.md) for cadence, angle rotation, and breakup email templates.
+
+
+## Quality Check
+
+Before presenting, gut-check:
+
+- Does it sound like a human wrote it? (Read it aloud)
+- Would YOU reply to this if you received it?
+- Does every sentence serve the reader, not the sender?
+- Is the personalization connected to the problem?
+- Is there one clear, low-friction ask?
+
+
+## What to Avoid
+
+- Opening with "I hope this email finds you well" or "My name is X and I work at Y"
+
+- Jargon: "synergy," "leverage," "circle back," "best-in-class," "leading provider"
+
+- Feature dumps. One proof point beats ten features.
+
+- HTML, images, or multiple links
+
+- Fake "Re:" or "Fwd:" subject lines
+
+- Identical templates with only {{FirstName}} swapped
+
+- Asking for 30-minute calls in first touch
+
+- Sending only "Just checking in" notes
+
+
+## Data & Benchmarks
+
+The references contain performance data if you need to make informed choices:
+
+- [benchmarks.md](references/benchmarks.md): Reply rates, conversion funnels, expert methods, common mistakes
+
+- [personalization.md](references/personalization.md): 4-level personalization system, research signals
+
+- [subject-lines.md](references/subject-lines.md): Subject line data and optimization
+
+- [follow-up-sequences.md](references/follow-up-sequences.md): Cadence, angles, breakup emails
+
+- [frameworks.md](references/frameworks.md): All copywriting frameworks with examples
+
+Use this data to inform your writing, not as a checklist to satisfy.
+
+
+## Related Skills
+
+- **prospecting**: For building and qualifying the prospect list that this skill writes outreach against. This is the natural step before cold-email
+
+- **copywriting**: For landing pages and web copy
+
+- **emails**: For lifecycle/nurture email sequences (not cold outreach)
+
+- **social**: For LinkedIn and social posts
+
+- **product-marketing**: For establishing foundational positioning
+
+- **revops**: For lead scoring, routing, and pipeline management

package/skills/business/startup-founder/references/marketing/competitors.md

@@ -0,0 +1,245 @@
+---
+name: competitors
+description: "When the user wants to create competitor comparison or alternative pages for SEO and sales enablement. Also use when the user mentions 'alternative page,' 'vs page,' 'competitor comparison,' 'comparison page,' '[Product] vs [Product],' '[Product] alternative,' 'competitive landing pages,' 'how do we compare to X,' 'battle card,' or 'competitor teardown.' Use this for any content that positions your product against competitors. Covers four formats: singular alternative, plural alternatives, you vs competitor, and competitor vs competitor. For sales-specific competitor docs, see sales-enablement."
+metadata:
+  version: 2.0.1
+
+# Competitor & Alternative Pages
+
+You are an expert in creating competitor comparison and alternative pages. Your goal is to build pages that rank for competitive search terms. The pages give genuine value to evaluators and position your product effectively.
+
+## Initial Assessment
+
+**Check for product marketing context first:**
+If `.agents/product-marketing.md` exists (or `.claude/product-marketing.md`, or the legacy `product-marketing-context.md` filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
+
+Before creating competitor pages, understand:
+
+1. **Your Product**
+   - Core value proposition
+   - Key differentiators
+   - Ideal customer profile
+   - Pricing model
+   - Strengths and honest weaknesses
+
+2. **Competitive Landscape**
+   - Direct competitors
+   - Indirect/adjacent competitors
+   - Market positioning of each
+   - Search volume for competitor terms
+
+3. **Goals**
+   - SEO traffic capture
+   - Sales enablement
+   - Conversion from competitor users
+   - Brand positioning
+
+
+## Core Principles
+
+### 1. Honesty Builds Trust
+- Acknowledge competitor strengths
+- Be accurate about your limitations
+- Do not misrepresent competitor features
+- Readers compare options. They will verify claims.
+
+### 2. Depth Over Surface
+- Go beyond feature checklists
+- Explain *why* differences matter
+- Include use cases and scenarios
+- Show, do not just tell
+
+### 3. Help Them Decide
+- Different tools fit different needs
+- Be clear about who you are best for
+- Be clear about who competitor is best for
+- Reduce evaluation friction
+
+### 4. Modular Content Architecture
+- Keep competitor data centralized
+- Updates propagate to all pages
+- Single source of truth per competitor
+
+
+## Page Formats
+
+### Format 1: [Competitor] Alternative (Singular)
+
+**Search intent**: User is actively looking to switch from a specific competitor
+
+**URL pattern**: `/alternatives/[competitor]` or `/[competitor]-alternative`
+
+**Target keywords**: "[Competitor] alternative", "alternative to [Competitor]", "switch from [Competitor]"
+
+**Page structure**:
+1. Why people look for alternatives (validate their pain)
+2. Summary: You as the alternative (quick positioning)
+3. Detailed comparison (features, service, pricing)
+4. Who should switch (and who should not)
+5. Migration path
+6. Social proof from switchers
+7. CTA
+
+
+### Format 2: [Competitor] Alternatives (Plural)
+
+**Search intent**: User researches options, earlier in journey
+
+**URL pattern**: `/alternatives/[competitor]-alternatives`
+
+**Target keywords**: "[Competitor] alternatives", "best [Competitor] alternatives", "tools like [Competitor]"
+
+**Page structure**:
+1. Why people look for alternatives (common pain points)
+2. What to look for in an alternative (criteria framework)
+3. List of alternatives (you first, but include real options)
+4. Comparison table (summary)
+5. Detailed breakdown of each alternative
+6. Recommendation by use case
+7. CTA
+
+**Important**: Include 4-7 real alternatives. Being genuinely helpful builds trust and ranks better.
+
+**AI-answer expectations by stage**: these pages often earn *citations* in AI answers. Whether AI *recommends* your brand from them depends on offsite consensus (reviews, forums, analysts). For emerging brands, a self-ranked list can surface the competitors in the AI answer while you get only the citation. Still publish for search intent and category framing, but set expectations accordingly. See the citations-vs-recommendations reference in ai-seo for the data.
+
+
+### Format 3: You vs [Competitor]
+
+**Search intent**: User is directly comparing you to a specific competitor
+
+**URL pattern**: `/vs/[competitor]` or `/compare/[you]-vs-[competitor]`
+
+**Target keywords**: "[You] vs [Competitor]", "[Competitor] vs [You]"
+
+**Page structure**:
+1. TL;DR summary (key differences in 2-3 sentences)
+2. At-a-glance comparison table
+3. Detailed comparison by category (Features, Pricing, Support, Ease of use, Integrations)
+4. Who [You] is best for
+5. Who [Competitor] is best for (be honest)
+6. What customers say (testimonials from switchers)
+7. Migration support
+8. CTA
+
+
+### Format 4: [Competitor A] vs [Competitor B]
+
+**Search intent**: User comparing two competitors (not you directly)
+
+**URL pattern**: `/compare/[competitor-a]-vs-[competitor-b]`
+
+**Page structure**:
+1. Overview of both products
+2. Comparison by category
+3. Who each is best for
+4. The third option (introduce yourself)
+5. Comparison table (all three)
+6. CTA
+
+**Why this works**: Captures search traffic for competitor terms, positions you as knowledgeable.
+
+
+## Essential Sections
+
+### TL;DR Summary
+Start every page with a quick summary for scanners: key differences in 2-3 sentences.
+
+### Paragraph Comparisons
+Go beyond tables. For each dimension, write a paragraph explaining the differences and when each matters.
+
+### Feature Comparison
+For each category: describe how each handles it, list strengths and limitations, give bottom line recommendation.
+
+### Pricing Comparison
+Include tier-by-tier comparison, included items, hidden costs, and total cost calculation for sample team size.
+
+### Who This Serves
+Be explicit about ideal customer for each option. Honest recommendations build trust.
+
+### Migration Section
+Cover what transfers, what needs reconfiguration, support offered, and quotes from customers who switched.
+
+**For detailed templates**: See [references/templates.md](references/templates.md)
+
+
+## Content Architecture
+
+### Centralized Competitor Data
+Create a single source of truth for each competitor with:
+- Positioning and target audience
+- Pricing (all tiers)
+- Feature ratings
+- Strengths and weaknesses
+- Best for / not ideal for
+- Common complaints (from reviews)
+- Migration notes
+
+**For data structure and examples**: See [references/content-architecture.md](references/content-architecture.md)
+
+
+## Research Process
+
+### Deep Competitor Research
+
+For each competitor, gather:
+
+1. **Product research**: Sign up, use it, document features/UX/limitations
+2. **Pricing research**: Current pricing, included items, hidden costs
+3. **Review mining**: G2, Capterra, TrustRadius for common praise/complaint themes
+4. **Customer feedback**: Talk to customers who switched (both directions)
+5. **Content research**: Their positioning, their comparison pages, their changelog
+
+### Ongoing Updates
+
+- **Quarterly**: Verify pricing, check for major feature changes
+- **When notified**: Customer mentions competitor change
+- **Annually**: Full refresh of all competitor data
+
+
+## SEO Considerations
+
+### Keyword Targeting
+
+| Format | Primary Keywords |
+|--------|-----------------|
+| Alternative (singular) | [Competitor] alternative, alternative to [Competitor] |
+| Alternatives (plural) | [Competitor] alternatives, best [Competitor] alternatives |
+| You vs Competitor | [You] vs [Competitor], [Competitor] vs [You] |
+| Competitor vs Competitor | [A] vs [B], [B] vs [A] |
+
+### Internal Linking
+- Link between related competitor pages
+- Link from feature pages to relevant comparisons
+- Create hub page linking to all competitor content
+
+### Schema Markup
+Consider FAQ schema for common questions like "What is the best alternative to [Competitor]?"
+
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Competitor Data File
+Complete competitor profile in YAML format for use across all comparison pages.
+
+### Page Content
+For each page: URL, meta tags, full page copy organized by section, comparison tables, CTAs.
+
+### Page Set Plan
+Recommended pages to create with priority order based on search volume.
+
+
+## Task-Specific Questions
+
+1. What are common reasons people switch to you?
+2. Do you have customer quotes about switching?
+3. What is your pricing vs. competitors?
+4. Do you offer migration support?
+
+
+## Related Skills
+
+- **programmatic-seo**: For building competitor pages at scale
+- **copywriting**: For writing compelling comparison copy
+- **seo-audit**: For optimizing competitor pages
+- **schema**: For FAQ and comparison schema
+- **sales-enablement**: For internal sales collateral, decks, and objection docs