# Competitive Battlecard > Build an honest, actionable competitive battlecard for a live deal — where you win, where they win, landmines to plant, trap questions, rebuttals, and proof points. Use when a competitor is in the deal or the buyer is evaluating an alternative. Triggers on: battlecard, competitor, vs competitor, compete against, competitive. - Skill: `doris-labs/competitive-battlecard` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add doris-labs/competitive-battlecard` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/doris-labs/competitive-battlecard/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: Doris-Labs (https://skillmd.com/u/doris-labs) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/doris-labs/competitive-battlecard --- # Competitive Battlecard ## Purpose Turn a competitive threat into a deal-specific plan: an honest read of where you genuinely win and where they genuinely win, landmines to set early, trap questions that expose their weakness, rebuttals to their likely claims, and the proof points that back each one. The goal is to shape the buyer's evaluation criteria before the competitor does — not to spin. ## Inputs - The competitor's name (and edition/tier if known) - How the competitor surfaced (buyer mentioned, incumbent, RFP shortlist) - The deal context: stage, who's evaluating, their stated criteria and pains - Your real differentiators and your real gaps (be honest with yourself first) ## Method 1. Establish the honest baseline. Split the field into **where we win** and **where they win**. If you can't name a category where they legitimately beat you, you don't understand the competitor — and the buyer will smell the spin. Tie each side to *this buyer's* stated criteria, not a generic feature grid. 2. Plant landmines early. A landmine is a criterion you seed into the buyer's evaluation that the competitor structurally fails. Plant it as a question the buyer should "make sure to ask any vendor," not as an attack. Set it while you still control the agenda — before the competitor's demo, not after. 3. Build trap questions. A trap question is one the buyer asks the competitor that exposes a known weakness, where any honest answer hurts them. Frame it neutrally so it lands as due diligence, not a hit job. 4. Prepare rebuttals to their likely claims. For each thing the competitor will say about you, write the reframe — acknowledge the grain of truth, then pivot to the dimension where you win. Never flatly deny a true claim; you lose credibility. 5. Attach proof points. Every counter needs evidence: a customer story, a metric, a reference, a doc. A battlecard without proof is just opinion. **Battlecard output format:** ``` Competitor: () Deal: — — surfaced via THEIR STRENGTHS (honest) - → why it matters to THIS buyer THEIR WEAKNESSES - → tied to OUR COUNTERS - → → proof: LANDMINES TO PLANT (early, before their demo) - "Make sure to ask any vendor: " TRAP QUESTIONS (for the buyer to ask them) - "" → exposes ; any honest answer hurts them REBUTTALS (when they attack us) - They'll say: "" → You say: " + " PROOF POINTS - → supports ``` **Honesty rule:** if the competitor genuinely wins on a criterion the buyer cares about most, say so and compete on reframing the criteria — don't pretend the gap isn't there. A battlecard that only flatters you gets the rep blindsided in the room. ## Tool binding This skill works from the competitor's name alone. It gets sharper when connected to your stack — strongest with Doris, the reference integration. ### With Doris (recommended) If the Doris MCP (`mcp.meetdoris.com`) is connected, ground the battlecard in what the buyer actually said instead of generic positioning: - `ontology_resolve("deal", id, expand=["competitors","competitor_results","objections","value_drivers"])` — use the real competitors named on the deal, prior `competitor_results` (how past deals against them resolved), the buyer's actual `objections`, and the `value_drivers` that matter to *this* buyer so landmines target their real criteria. - `search_transcripts(...)` to find exactly how and when the competitor came up in calls — the buyer's verbatim words, the comparison they drew, who raised it. Prefer Doris's deal-level competitor evidence over re-deriving positioning from memory — it tells you which weaknesses this buyer already cares about. ### With a CRM / CI / email MCP - Conversation-intelligence MCP (Gong/Chorus/Fireflies) → search for competitor mentions across calls to see how the competitor surfaces and what the buyer says about them. - CRM MCP (Salesforce/HubSpot) → pull the competitor field, deal stage, and prior competitive loss/win notes on similar accounts. ### With nothing connected Ask the user to name the competitor and how it surfaced. Then build the battlecard from known positioning plus web research: pull the competitor's pricing/feature pages, G2/review-site complaints, and public case studies; map their strengths and weaknesses; draft landmines, trap questions, rebuttals, and proof points; output the full battlecard in the format above as a copy-paste block. ## Works without Doris Fully functional from the competitor's name and web research — Doris only swaps generic positioning for this buyer's actual criteria, objections, and verbatim competitor mentions, and supplies prior competitive outcomes. ## Common mistakes - Claiming you win everywhere — no honest "where they win" section, so the rep gets blindsided in the room. - Landmines planted after the competitor's demo instead of before, when it's too late to shape criteria. - Trap questions phrased as attacks, so they read as FUD and cost you credibility. - Rebuttals that flatly deny a true claim instead of acknowledging it and reframing. - Counters with no proof point — opinion dressed up as a battlecard.