claude-code-arcane 1.0.0

package/skills/sales-engineer/assets/sample_rfp_data.json

@@ -0,0 +1,219 @@
+{
+  "rfp_name": "Enterprise Data Analytics Platform RFP",
+  "customer": "Acme Financial Services",
+  "due_date": "2026-03-15",
+  "deal_value": "$450,000 ARR",
+  "strategic_value": "high",
+  "requirements": [
+    {
+      "id": "R-001",
+      "requirement": "Real-time data ingestion from multiple sources (APIs, databases, streaming)",
+      "category": "Data Integration",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 8,
+      "notes": "Native connectors for 200+ data sources",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-002",
+      "requirement": "Support for SQL and NoSQL data sources",
+      "category": "Data Integration",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 4,
+      "notes": "Supports PostgreSQL, MySQL, MongoDB, Cassandra, and more",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-003",
+      "requirement": "Automated ETL pipeline creation with visual designer",
+      "category": "Data Integration",
+      "priority": "should-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 6,
+      "notes": "Drag-and-drop pipeline builder included",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-004",
+      "requirement": "Change data capture (CDC) for real-time sync",
+      "category": "Data Integration",
+      "priority": "should-have",
+      "coverage_status": "partial",
+      "effort_hours": 16,
+      "notes": "CDC supported for major databases; some require custom configuration",
+      "mitigation": "Document supported CDC sources; provide configuration guide for non-standard sources"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-005",
+      "requirement": "Interactive dashboard creation with drag-and-drop",
+      "category": "Analytics & Visualization",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 4,
+      "notes": "Full drag-and-drop dashboard builder with 50+ chart types",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-006",
+      "requirement": "Embedded analytics with white-labeling support",
+      "category": "Analytics & Visualization",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 8,
+      "notes": "Full embedding SDK with CSS customization",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-007",
+      "requirement": "Natural language query interface for business users",
+      "category": "Analytics & Visualization",
+      "priority": "should-have",
+      "coverage_status": "planned",
+      "effort_hours": 24,
+      "notes": "NLQ feature on roadmap for Q3 2026",
+      "mitigation": "Share roadmap timeline; offer guided query builder as interim solution"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-008",
+      "requirement": "Predictive analytics and ML model integration",
+      "category": "Analytics & Visualization",
+      "priority": "nice-to-have",
+      "coverage_status": "partial",
+      "effort_hours": 20,
+      "notes": "Python/R integration available; no built-in ML models",
+      "mitigation": "Demonstrate Python integration for custom models; provide example notebooks"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-009",
+      "requirement": "Role-based access control (RBAC) with row-level security",
+      "category": "Security & Compliance",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 6,
+      "notes": "Granular RBAC with row-level and column-level security",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-010",
+      "requirement": "SOC 2 Type II certification",
+      "category": "Security & Compliance",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 2,
+      "notes": "Current SOC 2 Type II report available upon NDA",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-011",
+      "requirement": "Data encryption at rest and in transit (AES-256, TLS 1.3)",
+      "category": "Security & Compliance",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 2,
+      "notes": "AES-256 at rest, TLS 1.3 in transit, customer-managed keys supported",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-012",
+      "requirement": "HIPAA compliance for healthcare data handling",
+      "category": "Security & Compliance",
+      "priority": "should-have",
+      "coverage_status": "gap",
+      "effort_hours": 40,
+      "notes": "HIPAA BAA not currently offered",
+      "mitigation": "Evaluate HIPAA certification timeline with compliance team; consider data masking as interim"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-013",
+      "requirement": "Horizontal scaling to handle 10B+ rows",
+      "category": "Performance & Scalability",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 8,
+      "notes": "Distributed query engine scales to 50B+ rows",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-014",
+      "requirement": "Sub-second query response for cached dashboards",
+      "category": "Performance & Scalability",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 4,
+      "notes": "Intelligent caching layer with <500ms p95 for cached queries",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-015",
+      "requirement": "Multi-region deployment with data residency controls",
+      "category": "Performance & Scalability",
+      "priority": "should-have",
+      "coverage_status": "partial",
+      "effort_hours": 20,
+      "notes": "US and EU regions available; APAC region in beta",
+      "mitigation": "Confirm customer region requirements; provide APAC beta access if needed"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-016",
+      "requirement": "RESTful API with comprehensive documentation",
+      "category": "API & Extensibility",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 4,
+      "notes": "Full REST API with OpenAPI spec and interactive documentation",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-017",
+      "requirement": "Webhook support for event-driven workflows",
+      "category": "API & Extensibility",
+      "priority": "should-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 4,
+      "notes": "Webhook support for 30+ event types",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-018",
+      "requirement": "Custom plugin/extension framework",
+      "category": "API & Extensibility",
+      "priority": "nice-to-have",
+      "coverage_status": "planned",
+      "effort_hours": 30,
+      "notes": "Plugin framework on roadmap for Q4 2026",
+      "mitigation": "Current API extensibility covers most use cases; plugin framework will expand options"
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-019",
+      "requirement": "24/7 enterprise support with 1-hour critical response time",
+      "category": "Support & SLA",
+      "priority": "must-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 2,
+      "notes": "Premium support tier includes 24/7 coverage with 30-min critical response SLA",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-020",
+      "requirement": "Dedicated customer success manager",
+      "category": "Support & SLA",
+      "priority": "should-have",
+      "coverage_status": "full",
+      "effort_hours": 2,
+      "notes": "Included in Enterprise tier",
+      "mitigation": ""
+    },
+    {
+      "id": "R-021",
+      "requirement": "On-premise deployment option",
+      "category": "Deployment",
+      "priority": "nice-to-have",
+      "coverage_status": "gap",
+      "effort_hours": 80,
+      "notes": "Cloud-only platform; no on-premise offering",
+      "mitigation": "Position cloud-first architecture benefits; offer VPC deployment as alternative"
+    }
+  ]
+}

package/skills/sales-engineer/assets/technical_proposal_template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,231 @@
+# Technical Proposal Template
+
+## Document Information
+
+| Field | Value |
+|-------|-------|
+| Customer | [Customer Name] |
+| Opportunity | [Opportunity Name / RFP Reference] |
+| Prepared By | [Sales Engineer Name] |
+| Date | [Date] |
+| Version | [Version Number] |
+| Classification | [Confidential / Internal] |
+
+---
+
+## 1. Executive Summary
+
+### Business Context
+
+[2-3 paragraphs summarizing the customer's business challenges and strategic objectives that this solution addresses. Focus on business outcomes, not technical features.]
+
+### Proposed Solution
+
+[1-2 paragraphs describing the solution at a high level, emphasizing how it addresses the specific challenges identified above.]
+
+### Key Value Propositions
+
+1. **[Value 1]:** [Quantified benefit, e.g., "Reduce reporting time by 60%"]
+2. **[Value 2]:** [Quantified benefit]
+3. **[Value 3]:** [Quantified benefit]
+
+### Recommended Approach
+
+[Brief overview of the implementation approach, timeline, and key milestones.]
+
+---
+
+## 2. Requirements Summary
+
+### Coverage Overview
+
+| Category | Requirements | Full | Partial | Planned | Gap | Coverage |
+|----------|-------------|------|---------|---------|-----|----------|
+| [Category 1] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [X%] |
+| [Category 2] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [N] | [X%] |
+| **Total** | **[N]** | **[N]** | **[N]** | **[N]** | **[N]** | **[X%]** |
+
+### Key Differentiators
+
+1. [Differentiator 1 with brief explanation]
+2. [Differentiator 2 with brief explanation]
+3. [Differentiator 3 with brief explanation]
+
+### Gap Mitigation Plan
+
+| Gap | Priority | Mitigation Strategy | Timeline |
+|-----|----------|-------------------|----------|
+| [Gap 1] | [Must/Should/Nice] | [Strategy] | [Date] |
+| [Gap 2] | [Must/Should/Nice] | [Strategy] | [Date] |
+
+---
+
+## 3. Solution Architecture
+
+### Architecture Overview
+
+[High-level architecture description. Include or reference an architecture diagram.]
+
+```
+[ASCII architecture diagram or reference to attached diagram]
+
+Example:
++------------------+     +------------------+     +------------------+
+|   Data Sources   | --> |   Our Platform   | --> |   Delivery       |
+|  - System A      |     |  - Ingestion     |     |  - Dashboards    |
+|  - System B      |     |  - Processing    |     |  - API           |
+|  - System C      |     |  - Analytics     |     |  - Exports       |
++------------------+     +------------------+     +------------------+
+                                  |
+                          +------------------+
+                          |   Management     |
+                          |  - Security      |
+                          |  - Monitoring    |
+                          |  - Admin         |
+                          +------------------+
+```
+
+### Component Details
+
+#### [Component 1]
+- **Purpose:** [What this component does]
+- **Technology:** [Underlying technology]
+- **Scaling:** [How it scales]
+- **Availability:** [HA/DR approach]
+
+#### [Component 2]
+- **Purpose:** [What this component does]
+- **Technology:** [Underlying technology]
+- **Scaling:** [How it scales]
+- **Availability:** [HA/DR approach]
+
+### Integration Architecture
+
+| Integration Point | Protocol | Direction | Frequency | Authentication |
+|-------------------|----------|-----------|-----------|---------------|
+| [System A] | REST API | Inbound | Real-time | OAuth 2.0 |
+| [System B] | JDBC | Inbound | Batch (hourly) | Service Account |
+| [System C] | Webhook | Outbound | Event-driven | API Key |
+
+### Security Architecture
+
+- **Authentication:** [SSO, SAML, OAuth, etc.]
+- **Authorization:** [RBAC, row-level security, etc.]
+- **Encryption:** [At rest, in transit, key management]
+- **Compliance:** [SOC 2, GDPR, HIPAA, etc.]
+- **Network:** [VPC, firewall, IP restrictions]
+
+---
+
+## 4. Implementation Plan
+
+### Phase Overview
+
+| Phase | Duration | Focus | Deliverables |
+|-------|----------|-------|-------------|
+| Phase 1: Foundation | [X weeks] | Environment setup, core configuration | Working environment, admin access |
+| Phase 2: Core Implementation | [X weeks] | Primary use cases, integrations | [Deliverables] |
+| Phase 3: Advanced Features | [X weeks] | Advanced scenarios, optimization | [Deliverables] |
+| Phase 4: Go-Live | [X weeks] | Testing, training, cutover | Production deployment |
+
+### Detailed Timeline
+
+```
+Week 1-2:   [Phase 1 - Foundation]
+  - Environment provisioning
+  - Security configuration
+  - Data source connectivity
+
+Week 3-6:   [Phase 2 - Core Implementation]
+  - Use case 1 implementation
+  - Use case 2 implementation
+  - Integration testing
+
+Week 7-8:   [Phase 3 - Advanced Features]
+  - Advanced analytics
+  - Custom workflows
+  - Performance optimization
+
+Week 9-10:  [Phase 4 - Go-Live]
+  - User acceptance testing
+  - Training sessions
+  - Production cutover
+  - Post-launch support
+```
+
+### Resource Requirements
+
+| Role | Hours | Phase(s) | Provider |
+|------|-------|----------|----------|
+| Solutions Architect | [X] | All | [Vendor] |
+| Implementation Engineer | [X] | 1-3 | [Vendor] |
+| Project Manager | [X] | All | [Vendor] |
+| Customer IT Admin | [X] | 1, 4 | [Customer] |
+| Customer Business Lead | [X] | 2-4 | [Customer] |
+
+### Training Plan
+
+| Audience | Format | Duration | Content |
+|----------|--------|----------|---------|
+| Administrators | Workshop | [X hours] | Configuration, security, monitoring |
+| Power Users | Workshop | [X hours] | Advanced features, reporting, automation |
+| End Users | Webinar | [X hours] | Core workflows, self-service analytics |
+
+---
+
+## 5. Risk Mitigation
+
+| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
+|------|------------|--------|------------|
+| [Risk 1] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Strategy] |
+| [Risk 2] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Strategy] |
+| [Risk 3] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Strategy] |
+
+---
+
+## 6. Commercial Summary
+
+### Pricing Overview
+
+| Component | Annual Cost |
+|-----------|------------|
+| Platform License | $[X] |
+| Implementation Services | $[X] |
+| Training | $[X] |
+| Premium Support | $[X] |
+| **Total Year 1** | **$[X]** |
+| **Annual Renewal** | **$[X]** |
+
+### ROI Projection
+
+| Metric | Current State | With Solution | Improvement |
+|--------|--------------|---------------|-------------|
+| [Metric 1] | [Value] | [Value] | [%] |
+| [Metric 2] | [Value] | [Value] | [%] |
+| [Metric 3] | [Value] | [Value] | [%] |
+
+**Estimated payback period:** [X months]
+
+---
+
+## 7. Next Steps
+
+1. [Next step 1 with owner and date]
+2. [Next step 2 with owner and date]
+3. [Next step 3 with owner and date]
+
+---
+
+## Appendices
+
+### A. Detailed Compliance Matrix
+[Reference to full requirement-by-requirement response]
+
+### B. Reference Customers
+[2-3 relevant customer references with industry, use case, and outcomes]
+
+### C. Architecture Diagrams
+[Detailed architecture diagrams]
+
+### D. Product Roadmap (Relevant Items)
+[Roadmap items relevant to this proposal with estimated delivery dates]

package/skills/sales-engineer/references/competitive-positioning-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,226 @@
+# Competitive Positioning Framework
+
+A comprehensive guide for Sales Engineers to analyze competitors, build battlecards, handle objections, and position for wins.
+
+## Competitive Analysis Methodology
+
+### 1. Intelligence Gathering
+
+**Primary Sources:**
+- Competitor product documentation and release notes
+- Analyst reports (Gartner, Forrester, IDC)
+- Customer feedback from win/loss reviews
+- Industry conferences and webinars
+- Public case studies and testimonials
+- Open-source repositories and API documentation
+
+**Secondary Sources:**
+- Glassdoor reviews (engineering culture, product direction)
+- Job postings (technology stack, expansion areas)
+- Patent filings (future direction signals)
+- Social media and community forums
+- Partner ecosystem announcements
+
+### 2. Feature Comparison Best Practices
+
+**Feature Scoring Scale:**
+
+| Score | Label | Definition |
+|-------|-------|------------|
+| 3 | Full | Complete, production-ready feature support |
+| 2 | Partial | Feature exists but with limitations or caveats |
+| 1 | Limited | Minimal implementation, significant gaps |
+| 0 | None | Feature not available |
+
+**Comparison Categories:**
+
+Organize features into weighted categories that reflect customer priorities:
+
+| Category | Typical Weight | What to Evaluate |
+|----------|---------------|------------------|
+| Core Functionality | 25-35% | Primary use case coverage |
+| Integration & API | 15-25% | Ecosystem connectivity |
+| Security & Compliance | 15-20% | Enterprise readiness |
+| Scalability & Performance | 10-20% | Growth capacity |
+| Usability & UX | 10-15% | Time to value |
+| Support & Services | 5-10% | Vendor partnership quality |
+
+**Weighting Guidelines:**
+- Adjust weights based on the specific customer's priorities
+- Security-sensitive industries (healthcare, finance) should weight compliance higher
+- High-growth companies should weight scalability higher
+- Enterprise deals should weight integration and support higher
+
+### 3. Differentiator Identification
+
+A differentiator is a feature or capability where your product scores highest among all compared products. Strong differentiators have these properties:
+
+- **Unique:** Only your product offers this capability
+- **Valuable:** Customers care about this capability
+- **Defensible:** Not easily replicated by competitors
+- **Demonstrable:** Can be shown in a demo or POC
+
+**Differentiator Categories:**
+
+| Type | Description | Example |
+|------|-------------|---------|
+| Feature Differentiator | Unique product capability | Native ML-powered anomaly detection |
+| Architecture Differentiator | Fundamental design advantage | Multi-tenant with data isolation |
+| Ecosystem Differentiator | Partner or integration advantage | 200+ native integrations |
+| Service Differentiator | Support or engagement model | Dedicated SE throughout contract |
+| Economic Differentiator | Pricing or TCO advantage | Usage-based pricing with no minimums |
+
+### 4. Vulnerability Assessment
+
+Vulnerabilities are features where competitors score higher than your product. Address vulnerabilities proactively:
+
+**Vulnerability Response Strategies:**
+
+1. **Acknowledge and redirect:** Confirm the gap, then pivot to your strength areas
+2. **Reframe the requirement:** Show why the customer's real need is better met differently
+3. **Demonstrate workaround:** Show how existing capabilities address the underlying need
+4. **Commit to roadmap:** Provide a credible timeline for native support
+5. **Partner solution:** Identify an integration partner that fills the gap
+
+## Objection Handling
+
+### Common Technical Objections
+
+#### "Your product lacks [Feature X]"
+**Response Framework:**
+1. Acknowledge: "You're right that [Feature X] is not a standalone feature today."
+2. Explore: "Help me understand the specific use case you need [Feature X] for."
+3. Redirect: "Our approach to solving that is [alternative], which actually provides [benefit]."
+4. Evidence: "Customer [reference] had the same concern and found [outcome]."
+
+#### "Competitor [Y] has better [Capability]"
+**Response Framework:**
+1. Acknowledge: "I understand [Competitor Y] has invested in [Capability]."
+2. Qualify: "Can you share what specific aspects of [Capability] are most important?"
+3. Differentiate: "While they focus on [approach], we take a different approach with [our method] because [reason]."
+4. Quantify: "The practical difference in real-world usage is [metric/evidence]."
+
+#### "Your product is too expensive"
+**Response Framework:**
+1. Acknowledge: "I appreciate you sharing that concern."
+2. Reframe: "Let's look at total cost of ownership rather than license cost alone."
+3. Quantify: "When you factor in [implementation, training, maintenance, time-to-value], the TCO comparison shows..."
+4. Value: "Based on our analysis, the ROI timeline is [X months], delivering [Y value]."
+
+#### "We're concerned about vendor lock-in"
+**Response Framework:**
+1. Acknowledge: "That's a smart concern for any technology investment."
+2. Evidence: "Our architecture uses [open standards, APIs, data portability features]."
+3. Demonstrate: "Here's how data export and migration work [show the feature]."
+4. Reference: "We can connect you with customers who evaluated this exact concern."
+
+### Objection Handling Principles
+
+1. **Never disparage competitors.** Focus on your strengths, not their weaknesses.
+2. **Ask questions first.** Understand the real concern behind the objection.
+3. **Use evidence.** Reference customers, benchmarks, and demonstrations.
+4. **Be honest about gaps.** Credibility is your most valuable asset.
+5. **Redirect to value.** Connect every response back to business outcomes.
+
+## Win/Loss Analysis
+
+### Post-Decision Review Process
+
+**Timing:** Conduct within 2 weeks of the decision for accurate recall.
+
+**Interview Questions (for wins):**
+1. What was the deciding factor in choosing us?
+2. Which features or capabilities were most compelling?
+3. How did our demo/POC compare to alternatives?
+4. What concerns did you have that were resolved during the process?
+5. What could we have done better in the evaluation process?
+
+**Interview Questions (for losses):**
+1. What was the primary reason for choosing the competitor?
+2. Were there specific requirements we did not meet?
+3. How did our demo/POC compare to the winning vendor?
+4. What would have changed your decision?
+5. Would you consider us for future evaluations?
+
+### Win/Loss Data Tracking
+
+| Data Point | Purpose |
+|-----------|---------|
+| Deal size | Pattern analysis by segment |
+| Industry | Vertical-specific insights |
+| Competitor | Head-to-head record |
+| Decision factors | Feature priority validation |
+| Sales cycle length | Process efficiency |
+| Stakeholder roles | Engagement strategy |
+| Technical requirements | Capability gap tracking |
+| POC outcome | POC process improvement |
+
+### Analysis Dimensions
+
+1. **By Competitor:** Win rate per competitor, common objections, feature gaps
+2. **By Segment:** Enterprise vs mid-market vs SMB patterns
+3. **By Industry:** Vertical-specific win factors
+4. **By Deal Size:** Large vs small deal dynamics
+5. **By Feature Category:** Which capabilities drive wins vs losses
+
+## Battlecard Creation
+
+### Battlecard Structure
+
+**Page 1: Quick Reference**
+- Competitor overview (company size, funding, market position)
+- Key strengths (top 3)
+- Key weaknesses (top 3)
+- Ideal customer profile for the competitor
+- Our win rate against this competitor
+
+**Page 2: Feature Comparison**
+- Category-by-category comparison (summary view)
+- Top differentiators (features where we lead)
+- Top vulnerabilities (features where they lead)
+- Parity features (features at same level)
+
+**Page 3: Talk Track**
+- Opening positioning statement
+- Discovery questions that expose competitor weaknesses
+- Objection responses for their key strengths
+- Proof points (customer references, benchmarks, case studies)
+- Trap-setting questions for demos and POCs
+
+**Page 4: Win Strategies**
+- Recommended evaluation criteria that favor our strengths
+- Demo scenarios that highlight our differentiators
+- POC success criteria that align with our capabilities
+- Pricing and packaging positioning
+- Stakeholder engagement strategy
+
+### Battlecard Maintenance
+
+- **Monthly review:** Update feature scores based on new releases
+- **Quarterly refresh:** Incorporate win/loss analysis findings
+- **Trigger-based update:** Major competitor release, pricing change, or acquisition
+
+## Competitive Positioning During Evaluations
+
+### Evaluation Stage Tactics
+
+| Stage | Tactic |
+|-------|--------|
+| Discovery | Ask questions that expose competitor weaknesses |
+| Demo | Lead with differentiators, show end-to-end workflows |
+| POC | Define success criteria aligned with your strengths |
+| Proposal | Quantify TCO advantage, emphasize implementation risk |
+| Negotiation | Leverage competitive urgency, offer migration assistance |
+
+### Influencing Evaluation Criteria
+
+The sales engineer's most impactful opportunity is shaping the evaluation criteria before the formal process begins:
+
+1. **Map criteria to strengths:** Propose evaluation categories where you excel
+2. **Weight appropriately:** Ensure critical categories (where you lead) carry higher weight
+3. **Define metrics:** Specific, measurable criteria favor the more capable product
+4. **Include non-obvious criteria:** Total cost of ownership, time-to-value, ecosystem breadth
+
+---
+
+**Last Updated:** February 2026