novahiz 0.1.0

package/bundled-skills/cross-linker/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,309 @@
+---
+name: cross-linker
+description: >
+  Scan the Obsidian wiki and automatically discover missing cross-references between pages.
+  Use this skill when the user says "link my pages", "find missing links", "cross-reference",
+  "connect my wiki", "add wikilinks", "what pages should be linked", or after any large ingestion
+  to ensure new pages are woven into the existing knowledge graph. Also trigger when the user
+  mentions "orphan pages" in the context of wanting to connect them, or says things like
+  "my wiki feels disconnected" or "pages aren't linked well". This is a write-heavy skill —
+  it actually modifies pages to add links, unlike wiki-lint which just reports issues.
+---
+
+# Cross-Linker — Automated Wiki Cross-Referencing
+
+You are weaving the wiki's knowledge graph tighter by finding and inserting missing `[[wikilinks]]` between pages that should reference each other but currently don't.
+
+**Follow the Retrieval Primitives table in `llm-wiki/SKILL.md`.** Build the registry in Step 1 by grepping frontmatter only (not full pages). Reserve full `Read` for the unlinked-mention detection pass, and even there, only read pages whose summaries/titles make them plausible link targets. Blind full-vault reads are what this framework exists to avoid.
+
+## Before You Start
+
+**Writing profile:** Before drafting or rewriting natural-language Markdown, read and apply the `Writing Profile Resolution` section in `llm-wiki/SKILL.md`. Framework schema, provenance, safety, and operation-specific requirements take precedence.
+`WRITING.md` preferences apply only to newly drafted or rewritten natural-language Markdown; preserve source content and structured records.
+
+1. **Resolve config** — follow the Config Resolution Protocol in `llm-wiki/SKILL.md` (inline `@name` override → walk up CWD for `.env` → global config → prompt setup). This gives `OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH` and `OBSIDIAN_LINK_FORMAT` (default: `wikilink`).
+2. Read `index.md` to get the full inventory of pages and their one-line descriptions
+3. Skim `log.md` to see what was recently ingested (focus linking effort on new pages)
+
+When inserting links in Step 4, apply the link format from `llm-wiki/SKILL.md` (Link Format section) using the `OBSIDIAN_LINK_FORMAT` value. When `OBSIDIAN_LINK_FORMAT=markdown`, compute the relative `.md` path from the **file being edited** to the target page.
+
+## Step 1: Build the Page Registry
+
+Glob all `.md` files in the vault (excluding `_archives/`, `_readouts/`, `.obsidian/`). For each page, extract:
+
+- **Filename** (without `.md`) — this is the wikilink target
+- **Title** from frontmatter
+- **Aliases** from frontmatter (if any)
+- **Tags** from frontmatter
+- **Category** from frontmatter or directory inference
+- **One-line summary** — first sentence or `title` field
+
+Build a lookup table:
+
+```
+page_name → { path, title, aliases, tags, summary }
+```
+
+This is your "vocabulary" — every entry in this table is a valid wikilink target.
+
+## Step 2: Scan for Missing Links
+
+For each page in the vault:
+
+1. **Read the full content**
+2. **Extract existing wikilinks** — find all `[[...]]` references already present
+3. **Search for unlinked mentions** — check if the page's text contains any of these, without being wrapped in `[[...]]`:
+   - Page filenames (e.g., the word "MyProject" appears but `[[projects/my-project/my-project]]` is missing)
+   - Page titles from frontmatter
+   - Aliases from frontmatter
+   - Entity names, project names, concept names from the registry
+
+4. **Check for semantic connections** — pages that share multiple tags or are in the same project directory but don't link to each other
+
+### Matching Rules
+
+- **Case-insensitive matching** for names (e.g., "my-project" matches page `MyProject`)
+- **Diacritic-insensitive matching** — normalize both the page name and the body text with Unicode NFKD (decompose accented characters to base + combining marks, strip combining marks) before comparing. This ensures body text "Muller" matches page `[[entities/müller]]` and vice versa.
+- **Skip self-references** — a page shouldn't link to itself
+- **Skip common words** — don't link "the", "and", generic terms. Only match on distinctive names
+- **Prefer the shortest unambiguous wikilink path** — use `[[page-name]]` not `[[full/path/to/page-name]]` when the name is unique across the vault
+- **Don't link inside code blocks** or frontmatter
+- **Don't double-link** — if `[[foo]]` already appears on the page, don't add another
+
+## Step 3: Score and Rank Suggestions
+
+Not every possible link is worth adding. Score each candidate using a composite signal, then tag it with a confidence label.
+
+### Scoring
+
+| Signal | Points | Example |
+|---|---|---|
+| **Exact name match in text** | +4 | "MyProject" appears in body text → link to my-project.md |
+| **Shared tags (2+)** | +2 | Both tagged `#ai #agent` but no link between them |
+| **Same project, no link** | +2 | Both under `projects/my-project/` but don't reference each other |
+| **Mentioned entity/concept** | +2 | Page mentions "knowledge graphs" → link to `[[concepts/knowledge-graphs]]` |
+| **Cross-category connection** | +2 | Source is in `concepts/`, target is in `entities/` (or `skills/` ↔ `synthesis/`) — different knowledge layers make this link more architecturally valuable |
+| **Peripheral→hub reach** | +2 | Source page has ≤ 2 total links (peripheral) but target has ≥ 8 (hub) — connecting a loose page to a load-bearing concept |
+| **Partial name match** | +1 | "graph" appears but page is `knowledge-graphs` — plausible but ambiguous |
+
+### Confidence labels
+
+Tag each candidate with a confidence label based on its score:
+
+| Score | Label | Action |
+|---|---|---|
+| ≥ 6 | **EXTRACTED** | Link is effectively certain — exact mention or very strong match. Apply inline. |
+| 3–5 | **INFERRED** | Link is a reasonable inference — shared context, cross-category, peripheral→hub. Apply inline or as Related section. |
+| 1–2 | **AMBIGUOUS** | Weak or partial match. Skip unless user specifically asks to connect loose pages. |
+
+Only act on **EXTRACTED** and **INFERRED** candidates. Include the confidence label in the Cross-Link Report so the user can review INFERRED links before trusting them.
+
+## Step 4: Apply Links
+
+**Pre-write snapshot** — before the first file write, check whether the vault itself is the root of a Git repository. Merely being a subdirectory of a larger repository does not qualify: running `git add -A` there could capture unrelated files. If the vault is not a standalone Git repository, skip this step silently — no nagging, no suggesting `git init`.
+
+```bash
+VAULT_REAL_PATH=$(cd "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" && pwd -P)
+VAULT_GIT_ROOT=$(git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || true)
+SNAPSHOT_SHA=""
+
+if [ -n "$VAULT_GIT_ROOT" ] && [ "$VAULT_GIT_ROOT" = "$VAULT_REAL_PATH" ]; then
+  if git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" diff --quiet \
+    && git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" diff --cached --quiet \
+    && [ -z "$(git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" ls-files --others --exclude-standard)" ]; then
+    SNAPSHOT_SHA=$(git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" rev-parse HEAD)
+  else
+    if ! git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" add -A; then
+      echo "Pre-write snapshot failed; abort the skill without writing any vault files." >&2
+      exit 1
+    fi
+    if ! git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" commit -m "pre-cross-linker snapshot" --quiet; then
+      echo "Pre-write snapshot failed; abort the skill without writing any vault files." >&2
+      exit 1
+    fi
+    SNAPSHOT_SHA=$(git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" rev-parse HEAD)
+  fi
+fi
+```
+
+The clean-repository branch deliberately avoids calling `git commit`, so "nothing to commit" is not treated as an error. If `git add` or `git commit` fails, stop before editing the vault; never continue without the promised snapshot.
+
+If `SNAPSHOT_SHA` is non-empty and the skill writes files, include the SHA in the final report. To discard the entire run, after confirming there are no later changes worth keeping, the user can run:
+
+```bash
+git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" reset --hard "$SNAPSHOT_SHA"
+git -C "$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH" clean -fd
+```
+
+For each page with missing links:
+
+### 4a: Inline linking (preferred)
+
+Find the first natural mention of the term in the body text and wrap it in wikilinks:
+
+**Before:**
+```markdown
+This project uses knowledge graphs to connect entities.
+```
+
+**After:**
+```markdown
+This project uses [[concepts/knowledge-graphs|knowledge graphs]] to connect entities.
+```
+
+Use the `[[path|display text]]` format when the wikilink path differs from the display text.
+
+### 4b: Related section (fallback)
+
+If the term isn't mentioned naturally in the body but the pages are semantically related (shared tags, same project), add a `## Related` section at the bottom of the page:
+
+```markdown
+## Related
+
+- [[projects/my-project/my-project]] — Also uses AI agents for research automation
+- [[concepts/knowledge-graphs]] — Core technique used in this project
+```
+
+If a `## Related` section already exists, append to it. Don't duplicate existing entries.
+
+### 4c: Infer and write relationship type
+
+For every EXTRACTED or INFERRED link added (inline or related section), infer a semantic relationship type from the surrounding sentence context and write it to the page's `relationships:` frontmatter block. Skip AMBIGUOUS links.
+
+**Type inference rules** — scan the sentence containing the mention (or, for related-section links, the page title and shared-tag context):
+
+| Sentence pattern | Inferred type |
+|---|---|
+| "X extends / builds on / generalises Y" | `extends` |
+| "X implements / is an implementation of Y" | `implements` |
+| "X contradicts / opposes / refutes / is at odds with Y" | `contradicts` |
+| "X is derived from / based on / adapted from Y" | `derived_from` |
+| "X uses / relies on / depends on / requires Y" | `uses` |
+| "X replaces / supersedes / deprecates Y" | `replaces` |
+| Shared tags or cross-category inference with no directional cue | `related_to` |
+
+If the surrounding context is ambiguous or the link came from shared-tag matching (no in-body mention), default to `related_to`.
+
+**Writing the block:**
+
+Read the page's YAML frontmatter. If a `relationships:` block already exists, append new entries without duplicating existing targets. If the block is absent, add it after `aliases:` (or after `tags:` when `aliases:` is missing).
+
+```yaml
+relationships:
+  - target: "[[concepts/knowledge-graphs]]"
+    type: uses
+```
+
+Always use wikilink format (`[[path/to/page]]`) for `target` values in the `relationships:` YAML block — regardless of `OBSIDIAN_LINK_FORMAT`. The `OBSIDIAN_LINK_FORMAT` setting controls body content; frontmatter properties always use wikilink syntax so that `wiki-export` can reliably parse them.
+
+Only add entries for links added in this cross-linker run — do not touch typed entries that were already present.
+
+## Step 5: Score Misc Page Affinity
+
+After the main linking pass, update affinity scores for all pages in `misc/` (pages with `promotion_status: misc` in their frontmatter, or located under the `misc/` directory).
+
+For each misc page:
+
+1. **Collect outgoing links** — all `[[wikilinks]]` in the page body
+2. **Collect incoming links** — grep the vault for `[[misc/<slug>]]` and `[[<slug>]]` references
+3. For each linked page (both directions), check if it belongs to a project:
+   - Lives under `projects/<project-name>/`
+   - Has a `project:` frontmatter field matching a project name
+4. Group by project name and sum: `outgoing_links + incoming_links`
+5. Update the `affinity` frontmatter block on the misc page:
+
+```yaml
+affinity:
+  obsidian-wiki: 3
+  another-project: 1
+```
+
+6. If any project's score ≥ 3: flag this page as a **promotion candidate** and record it for the report
+
+**Efficiency note:** only read the full body of misc pages — other pages only need a frontmatter grep to determine their project membership.
+
+## Step 6: Report
+
+Present a summary:
+
+```markdown
+## Cross-Link Report
+
+### Links Added: 23 across 12 pages
+
+| Page | Links Added | Confidence | Placement | Relationship Types |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| `projects/my-project/my-project.md` | 3 | EXTRACTED | 2 inline, 1 related | uses ×2, related_to ×1 |
+| `entities/jane-doe.md` | 5 | INFERRED | 3 inline, 2 related | extends ×1, uses ×3, related_to ×1 |
+| ... | | | | |
+
+### Orphan Pages Remaining: 2
+- `references/foo.md` — no incoming or outgoing links found
+- `concepts/bar.md` — could not find related pages
+
+### Misc Promotion Candidates: N
+Pages in misc/ that have ≥ 3 connections to a single project — ready to be promoted:
+
+| Page | Top Project | Score |
+|---|---|---|
+| `misc/web-martinfowler-articles-microservices.md` | `obsidian-wiki` | 4 |
+
+To promote: move the page to `projects/<project-name>/references/` and update all backlinks.
+
+### Pages Skipped: 3
+- `index.md`, `log.md` — special files
+- `_archives/*` — archived content
+- `_readouts/*` — derived readouts (wiki-narrate output)
+```
+
+## Step 7: Update Log and Hot Cache
+
+Append to `log.md`:
+```
+- [TIMESTAMP] CROSS_LINK pages_scanned=N links_added=M typed_relations_written=T pages_modified=P orphans_remaining=Q misc_affinity_updated=R promotion_candidates=S
+```
+
+**`hot.md`** — Read `$OBSIDIAN_VAULT_PATH/hot.md` (create from the template in `wiki-ingest` if missing). Update **Recent Activity** with a one-line summary of what was linked — e.g. "Cross-linked 23 mentions across 12 pages; 2 orphans remain." Keep the last 3 operations. Update `updated` timestamp.
+
+## Tips
+
+- **Run after every ingest.** New pages are almost always poorly connected. This is the fix.
+- **Be conservative with inline links.** Only link the first natural mention, not every occurrence.
+- **Don't touch pages in `_archives/` or `_readouts/`.** Archives are frozen snapshots; readouts are derived output from `wiki-narrate`, not knowledge pages.
+- **Respect existing structure.** If a page carefully curates its links in a `## Key Concepts` section, add to that section rather than creating a separate `## Related`.
+- **Entity pages are link magnets.** An entity like `jane-doe` should be linked from almost every project page. Prioritize these.
+
+## QMD Refresh After Vault Writes
+
+QMD is a search index, not the source of truth. If `$QMD_WIKI_COLLECTION` is empty or unset, skip this step. Run it only after this skill has written or rewritten vault markdown. If QMD refresh fails, do not roll back the vault changes; report the QMD status separately.
+
+Use `$QMD_CLI` if set; otherwise use `qmd`.
+
+```bash
+${QMD_CLI:-qmd} update
+```
+
+If the output says vectors are needed or embeddings may be stale, run:
+
+```bash
+${QMD_CLI:-qmd} embed
+```
+
+Verify the collection with either:
+
+```bash
+${QMD_CLI:-qmd} ls "$QMD_WIKI_COLLECTION"
+```
+
+or, when a specific page path is known:
+
+```bash
+${QMD_CLI:-qmd} get "qmd://$QMD_WIKI_COLLECTION/<page>.md" -l 5
+```
+
+Record one of:
+- `QMD refreshed: update + embed + verified`
+- `QMD refreshed: update only + verified`
+- `QMD skipped: QMD_WIKI_COLLECTION unset`
+- `QMD skipped: qmd CLI unavailable`
+- `QMD failed: <short error summary>`

package/bundled-skills/customer-research/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,305 @@
+---
+name: customer-research
+description: When the user wants to conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research. Use when the user mentions "customer research," "ICP research," "talk to customers," "analyze transcripts," "customer interviews," "survey analysis," "support ticket analysis," "voice of customer," "VOC," "build personas," "customer personas," "jobs to be done," "JTBD," "what do customers say," "what are customers struggling with," "Reddit mining," "G2 reviews," "review mining," "digital watering holes," "community research," "forum research," "competitor reviews," "customer sentiment," "PMF survey," "product/market fit survey," "customer interview questions," "interview outreach," "Sales Safari," or "find out why customers churn/convert/buy." Use for analyzing existing research assets, mining online sources, AND running primary research (interviews and surveys). For writing copy informed by research, see copywriting. For acting on research to improve pages, see cro.
+metadata:
+  version: 2.0.2
+---
+
+# Customer Research
+
+You are an expert customer researcher. Your goal is to help uncover what customers actually think, feel, say, and struggle with — so that everything from positioning to product to copy is grounded in reality rather than assumption.
+
+## Before Starting
+
+**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 to skip questions already answered.
+
+---
+
+## Three Modes of Research
+
+### Mode 1: Analyze Existing Assets
+You have raw research material (transcripts, surveys, reviews, tickets). Your job is to extract signal.
+
+### Mode 2: Mine Existing Signal (Online)
+You gather intel from online sources (Reddit, G2, forums, communities, review sites) — customers speaking in public, unprompted. Your job is to know where to look and what to extract.
+
+### Mode 3: Go Ask (Primary Research)
+No signal exists yet, or you need answers only the customer can give. You run interviews and surveys directly. For the full playbook — the PMF survey, 5-why laddering, outreach templates, incentives, best-customer recruiting, and the confirmation-bias guardrail — read `references/interviews-and-surveys.md`.
+
+Most engagements combine modes. Mine what's already public (Mode 2) before you ask (Mode 3) — it tells you what to ask and in whose words. Establish which mode(s) apply before proceeding.
+
+---
+
+## Mode 1: Analyzing Existing Research Assets
+
+### Asset Types
+
+**Customer interview / sales call transcripts**
+- Extract: pains, triggers, desired outcomes, language used, objections, alternatives considered
+- Look for: the moment they decided to look for a solution, what they tried before, what success looks like to them
+
+**Survey results**
+- Segment responses by customer tier, use case, or tenure before drawing conclusions
+- Flag: what open-ended answers say vs. what multiple-choice answers say (they often conflict)
+- Identify: the 20% of responses that contain the most useful signal
+
+**Customer support conversations**
+- Mine for: recurring complaints, confusion points, feature requests, and "I wish it could…" language
+- Categorize tickets before analyzing — don't treat all tickets as equal signal
+- Separate bugs from confusion from missing features from expectation mismatches
+
+**Win/loss interviews and churned customer notes**
+- Wins: what tipped the decision? What almost made them choose a competitor?
+- Losses and churn: was it price, features, fit, timing, or something else?
+- Segment by reason — don't average across different churn causes
+
+**NPS responses**
+- Passives and detractors are higher signal than promoters for improvement work
+- Pair scores with verbatims — a 9 with a specific complaint beats a 10 with no comment
+
+### Extraction Framework
+
+For each asset, extract:
+
+1. **Jobs to Be Done** — what outcome is the customer trying to achieve?
+   - Functional job: the task itself
+   - Emotional job: how they want to feel
+   - Social job: how they want to be perceived
+
+2. **Pain Points** — what's frustrating, broken, or inadequate about their current situation?
+   - Prioritize pains mentioned unprompted and with emotional language
+
+3. **Trigger Events** — what changed that made them seek a solution?
+   - Common triggers: team growth, new hire, missed target, embarrassing incident, competitor doing something
+
+4. **Desired Outcomes** — what does success look like in their words?
+   - Capture exact quotes, not paraphrases
+
+5. **Language and Vocabulary** — exact words and phrases customers use
+   - This is gold for copy. "We were drowning in spreadsheets" > "manual process inefficiency"
+
+6. **Alternatives Considered** — what else did they look at or try?
+   - Includes doing nothing, hiring someone, or building internally
+
+### Synthesis Steps
+
+After extracting from individual assets:
+
+1. **Cluster by theme** — group similar pains, outcomes, and triggers across assets
+2. **Frequency + intensity scoring** — how often does a theme appear, and how strongly is it felt?
+3. **Segment by customer profile** — do patterns differ by company size, role, use case, or tenure?
+4. **Identify the "money quotes"** — 5-10 verbatim quotes that best represent each theme
+5. **Flag contradictions** — where do customers say one thing but do another?
+
+### Research Quality Guardrails
+
+Label every insight with a confidence level before presenting it:
+
+| Confidence | Criteria |
+|------------|----------|
+| **High** | Theme appears in 3+ independent sources; mentioned unprompted; consistent across segments |
+| **Medium** | Theme appears in 2 sources, or only prompted, or limited to one segment |
+| **Low** | Single source; could be an outlier; needs validation |
+
+**Recency window**: Weight sources from the last 12 months more heavily. Markets shift — a 3-year-old transcript may reflect a different product and buyer.
+
+**Sample bias checks**:
+- Online reviewers skew toward power users and people with strong opinions
+- Support tickets skew toward problems, not value
+- Reddit skews technical and skeptical vs. mainstream buyers
+- Factor this in when drawing conclusions about "all customers"
+
+**Minimum viable sample**: Don't build personas or draw messaging conclusions from fewer than 5 independent data points per segment.
+
+---
+
+## Mode 2: Digital Watering Hole Research
+
+Online communities are where customers speak without a filter. The goal is to find authentic, unmoderated language about the problem space.
+
+### Where to Look
+
+Choose sources based on your ICP type — then read `references/source-guides.md` for detailed playbooks, search operators, and per-platform extraction tips.
+
+| ICP Type | Primary Sources |
+|----------|----------------|
+| B2B SaaS / technical buyers | Reddit (role-specific subs), G2/Capterra, Hacker News, LinkedIn, Indie Hackers, SparkToro |
+| SMB / founders | Reddit (r/entrepreneur, r/smallbusiness), Indie Hackers, Product Hunt, Facebook Groups, SparkToro |
+| Developer / DevOps | r/devops, r/programming, Hacker News, Stack Overflow, Discord servers |
+| B2C / consumer | App store reviews (1-3 star), Reddit hobby/lifestyle subs, YouTube comments, TikTok/Instagram comments |
+| Enterprise | LinkedIn, industry analyst reports, G2 Enterprise filter, job postings, SparkToro |
+
+**Quick decision guide:**
+- Have a product category? → Start with G2/Capterra reviews (yours + competitors)
+- Need to know where your audience spends time? → SparkToro (reveals podcasts, YouTube, subreddits, websites, social accounts)
+- Need raw language? → Reddit and YouTube comments
+- Need trigger events? → LinkedIn posts, job postings, Hacker News "Ask HN" threads
+- Need competitive intel? → Competitor 4-star reviews on G2; Product Hunt discussions; SparkToro competitor audience analysis
+
+### What to Extract from Each Source
+
+For every piece of content you find:
+
+| Field | What to Capture |
+|-------|----------------|
+| Source | Platform, thread URL, date |
+| Verbatim quote | Exact words — don't paraphrase |
+| Context | What prompted the comment? |
+| Sentiment | Positive / negative / neutral / frustrated |
+| Theme tag | Pain / trigger / outcome / alternative / language |
+| Customer profile signals | Role, company size, industry hints from the post |
+
+### Research Synthesis Template
+
+After gathering from multiple sources, synthesize into:
+
+```
+## Top Themes (ranked by frequency × intensity)
+
+### Theme 1: [Name]
+**Summary**: [1-2 sentences]
+**Frequency**: Appeared in X of Y sources
+**Intensity**: High / Medium / Low (based on emotional language used)
+**Representative quotes**:
+- "[exact quote]" — [source, date]
+- "[exact quote]" — [source, date]
+**Implications**: What this means for messaging / product / positioning
+
+### Theme 2: ...
+```
+
+---
+
+## Mode 3: Interviews & Surveys (Primary Research)
+
+When there's no signal yet — or you need answers only the customer can give — go ask. This is the highest-signal, first-party research: weight it above scraped sources when they conflict.
+
+**Load `references/interviews-and-surveys.md` before running any interview or survey.** It covers:
+
+- **The first rule of customer research: you do not talk about customer research** — keep calls casual so customers give real answers, not performed ones
+- **Prove yourself wrong, not right** — research is disconfirmation, not validation (the Dropbox sync-speed example)
+- **Amy Hoy's Sales Safari** — passively mine pains, jargon, recommendations, and worldview from where the audience already gathers
+- **Recruiting your best customers** — segment the CRM by deal size / short sales cycle / low churn; ask sales & CS for referrals; always close with *"who else should we talk to?"*
+- **Outreach email template** and **incentives** — $50/call, $5/survey; aim for 10 calls, be happy with 5
+- **Keep Asking Why (5-why laddering)** — worked example laddering a churn answer down to NRR; pain points vs. passion points
+- **The PMF survey (Sean Ellis / Superhuman)** — *"How would you feel if you could no longer use [product]?"*; the **40% "very disappointed"** benchmark (Superhuman reached 58%)
+
+Analyze whatever you gather back through the Mode 1 extraction framework and confidence guardrails above.
+
+---
+
+## Persona Generation
+
+### When there are no reviews yet
+
+Early-stage products (or new categories) lack first-party review data. Don't invent personas — walk outward through proxy sources, in order:
+
+1. **Your own differentiator** — what the product does differently defines who feels that difference most; write the hypothesis down as a hypothesis
+2. **Direct competitors' reviews** — their customers describe the problem space in their words (note what's praised and what's missing)
+3. **Comparable products on marketplaces** — Amazon/app-store reviews for adjacent solutions to the same job
+4. **Adjacent brands sharing the audience** — what else this buyer buys; their reviews reveal the buyer's broader language and values
+
+Personas built this way are provisional: tag each with its proxy source, and replace proxy evidence with first-party evidence as real reviews arrive.
+
+
+Personas should be built from research, not invented. Don't create a persona until you have at least 5-10 data points (interviews, reviews, or community posts) from a consistent segment.
+
+### Persona Structure
+
+```
+## [Persona Name] — [Role/Title]
+
+**Profile**
+- Title range: [e.g., "Marketing Manager to VP of Marketing"]
+- Company size: [e.g., "50–500 employees, Series A–C SaaS"]
+- Industry: [if narrow]
+- Reports to: [who]
+- Team size managed: [if relevant]
+
+**Primary Job to Be Done**
+[One sentence: what outcome are they trying to achieve in their role?]
+
+**Trigger Events**
+What causes them to start looking for a solution like yours?
+- [trigger 1]
+- [trigger 2]
+
+**Top Pains**
+1. [Pain — in their words if possible]
+2. [Pain]
+3. [Pain]
+
+**Desired Outcomes**
+- [What success looks like to them]
+- [How they measure it]
+- [How it makes them look to their boss/team]
+
+**Objections and Fears**
+- [What makes them hesitate to buy or switch]
+
+**Alternatives They Consider**
+- [Competitor, DIY, do nothing, hire someone]
+
+**Key Vocabulary**
+Words and phrases they actually use (sourced from research):
+- "[phrase]"
+- "[phrase]"
+
+**How to Reach Them**
+- Channels: [where they spend time]
+- Content they consume: [formats, topics]
+- Influencers/communities they trust: [specific names if known]
+```
+
+### Persona Anti-Patterns
+
+- **Don't name them cutely** ("Marketing Mary") unless your team finds it helpful — it's often a distraction
+- **Don't average across segments** — a persona that represents everyone represents no one
+- **Don't invent details** — if you don't have data on something, leave it blank rather than filling it in
+- **Revisit quarterly** — personas decay as your market and product evolve
+
+---
+
+## Deliverable Formats
+
+Depending on what the user needs, offer:
+
+1. **Research synthesis report** — themes, quotes, patterns, and implications
+2. **VOC quote bank** — organized verbatim quotes by theme, for use in copy
+3. **Persona document** — 1-3 personas built from the research
+4. **Jobs-to-be-done map** — functional, emotional, and social jobs by segment
+5. **Competitive intelligence summary** — what customers say about competitors vs. you
+6. **Research gap analysis** — what you still don't know and how to find it
+
+Ask the user which deliverable(s) they need before generating output.
+
+---
+
+## Questions to Ask Before Proceeding
+
+If context is unclear:
+
+1. **What's the goal?** Improve messaging? Build personas? Find product gaps? Understand churn?
+2. **What do you already have?** (transcripts, surveys, tickets, G2 reviews, nothing)
+3. **Who is the target segment?** (all customers, a specific tier, churned users, prospects who didn't buy)
+4. **What's your product?** (if not in the product marketing context file)
+5. **What do you want delivered?** (synthesis report, persona, quote bank, competitive intel)
+
+Don't ask all five at once — lead with #1 and #2, then follow up as needed.
+
+---
+
+## Related Skills
+
+| When to hand off | Skill |
+|-----------------|-------|
+| Writing copy informed by the research | `copywriting` |
+| Optimizing a page using VOC insights | `cro` |
+| Building a competitor comparison page | `competitors` |
+| Creating a churn prevention strategy from churn research | `churn-prevention` |
+| Planning paid ads informed by research | `ads` |
+| Writing cold email using research on pain/trigger | `cold-email` |
+| Translating customer research into an ICP for outbound | `prospecting` |
+| Planning content based on discovered topics | `content-strategy` |
+| Rolling research into a comprehensive marketing plan | `marketing-plan` |