Category Design

Pack Availability Guard

Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check .agents/project.json.enabled_packs. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend $pack install <pack> instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.

Category Design — Play Bigger Category Creation

Invoke as $category-design.

Report-First Approval Gate

Default to report-only: present findings, evidence coverage, assumptions, recommended artifact path, and proposed file changes in a pre-approval alignment page plus a concise conversation summary for user approval before creating or updating canonical research files.

Do not write or overwrite synthesized deliverables until the user explicitly approves. Raw evidence capture may be persisted before analysis when reproducibility requires it.

When stopping for approval, build and attempt to open the alignment preview page first, then ask the user to review it and approve, question, or request adjustments. Do not include Recommended next skill, Recommended next command, or downstream routing language until after final compiled YAML has been provided and the approved artifacts have been written or updated.

Evidence And Feedback Handling

Treat user feedback as input to evaluate, not as automatic ground truth.

• For factual, evidentiary, technical, or source-backed claims: verify against available evidence. If the user appears to misunderstand the evidence or states something factually incorrect, push back clearly and cite the evidence. Do not rewrite findings merely to agree.
• For taste, brand, positioning preference, risk appetite, prioritization, or other subjective judgment calls: weigh user feedback heavily and adapt the recommendation unless it conflicts with verified evidence.
• When feedback mixes facts and preference, separate them explicitly: correct the factual part, then incorporate the preference where it is a legitimate judgment call.
• When uncertain, say what is known, what is inferred, and what would change the conclusion.

Purpose

Applies the Play Bigger category design framework to determine whether the product should compete in an existing category, carve a subcategory, or create an entirely new category. When category creation is warranted, develops category naming, Point of View (POV), and ecosystem mapping. Produces an intermediate artifact for the parent $positioning synthesis.

Prerequisites

• Hard: research/competitive-analysis.md (or research/{slug}/competitive-analysis.md) must exist. If not, tell the user to run $competitive-analysis first and stop.
• Hard: research/icp.md (or research/{slug}/icp.md) must exist. If not, tell the user to run $icp first and stop.
• Hard: research/journey-map.md (or research/{slug}/journey-map.md) must exist. If not, tell the user to run $journey-map first and stop.
• Soft: Read if they exist:
  • research/customer-feedback.md — language that signals category dissatisfaction
  • research/positioning-jtbd.md — job framing that may define a new category boundary
  • research/positioning-strategic-canvas.md — value curve divergence suggesting new space
  • research/positioning.md — existing positioning to build upon

Product-Path Scope Resolution

Resolve research scope by product path before using code or app structure as a hint:

1. If $ARGUMENTS names a non-archived research/{slug}/ directory or a product-path ID whose scope_path points there, use that path.
2. If $ARGUMENTS names only an archived path, stop and warn.
3. Read research/.progress.yaml when present. Normalize legacy active_path to active_paths.
4. If active product paths exist in the manifest, use those paths. Ask when multiple active paths exist.
5. If no active manifest target exists, list non-archived product directories under research/. Auto-select only when exactly one exists.
6. If no product directories exist, use flat research/ single-product mode.

Process

1. Load Context

• Read research/competitive-analysis.md — existing categories, how competitors position
• Read research/icp.md — customer language about the problem space
• Read research/journey-map.md — where category expectations break down
• Read prior framework outputs if available

2. Category Diagnosis

Determine which category strategy is appropriate by evaluating three options:

Existing category — Compete within a known category:

• When: the category is well-understood, you can win on a specific dimension, buyers already search for this category
• Risk: you inherit comparison criteria set by the category leader

Subcategory — Carve a niche within an existing category:

• When: you serve a specific segment much better than generic solutions, the parent category is recognized but you need differentiation
• Risk: the niche may be too small or the parent category absorbs it

New category — Create a category that doesn't exist yet:

• When: existing categories constrain your value, buyers are frustrated by current framing, a genuine market shift enables new thinking
• Risk: expensive, slow, requires sustained investment in education

Use WebSearch (3-5 queries) to validate category landscape:

• "[domain] market categories", "[domain] Gartner/Forrester category"
• "[problem space] new category", "[competitor] category creation"
• "is [category] a real category", "[domain] category evolution"

Present diagnosis. If the session is already in Plan mode, prefer request_user_input; otherwise ask in plain text:

• "Based on evidence, I recommend [existing/subcategory/new] category strategy because [reasons]. The alternatives have these trade-offs: [trade-offs]. Does this match your ambition and resources?"

3. Category Naming (if subcategory or new)

If the diagnosis recommends subcategory or new category:

• Generate 5-7 candidate category names
• Evaluate each against criteria:
  • Descriptive: Does it explain what the category does?
  • Differentiated: Does it clearly separate from adjacent categories?
  • Memorable: Is it easy to say, search, and remember?
  • Expandable: Can it grow beyond the initial product?
  • Not already claimed: Is another company using this name?

Use WebSearch to validate name availability and adjacency.

Present candidates. If the session is already in Plan mode, prefer request_user_input; otherwise ask in plain text:

• "Here are candidate category names with trade-offs. Which resonates? Any naming constraints I should know?"

4. Point of View (POV) Development

Develop the category POV — the worldview that makes this category inevitable:

• The old way: How things work today (and why it's broken)
• The shift: What's changing that makes the old way untenable
• The new way: How things should work (the category vision)
• The proof: Evidence that the shift is real and happening now

The POV should:

• Be bigger than the product (it's about the category, not features)
• Create urgency (why now, not later)
• Resonate emotionally (not just rationally)
• Be defensible (rooted in real trends, not manufactured urgency)

5. Ecosystem Mapping

Map the ecosystem that would surround this category:

• Adjacent categories: What categories does this border?
• Potential allies: Who benefits from this category existing?
• Potential partners: What complementary products would integrate?
• Analysts/influencers: Who would cover this category?
• Ecosystem maturity: How developed is the supporting infrastructure?

6. Assess Category Creation Feasibility

If recommending new category, honestly assess:

7. Write Output

Only after user approval.

Output

research/positioning-category-design.md (or research/{slug}/positioning-category-design.md)

# Category Design Analysis

> Based on: research/competitive-analysis.md, research/icp.md, research/journey-map.md
> Date: [current date]
> Methodology: Play Bigger Category Design

## Category Diagnosis

**Recommendation**: [Existing / Subcategory / New Category]
**Confidence**: [Strong / Moderate / Weak]
**Rationale**: [2-3 sentences]

### Options Evaluated

| Strategy | Fit | Pros | Cons | Evidence |
|----------|-----|------|------|----------|
| Existing: [name] | [H/M/L] | [pros] | [cons] | [source] |
| Subcategory: [name] | [H/M/L] | [pros] | [cons] | [source] |
| New: [name] | [H/M/L] | [pros] | [cons] | [source] |

## Category Name (if subcategory or new)

**Recommended name**: [name]
**Alternatives considered**: [list with reasons rejected]

### Name Evaluation

| Criterion | Score | Notes |
|-----------|-------|-------|
| Descriptive | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Differentiated | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Memorable | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Expandable | [1-5] | [notes] |
| Available | [Y/N] | [notes] |

## Point of View

### The Old Way
[How things work today — the broken status quo]

### The Shift
[What's changing — the trend that makes the old way untenable]

### The New Way
[The category vision — how things should work]

### The Proof
[Evidence the shift is real: market signals, customer behavior, technology trends]

## Ecosystem Map

### Adjacent Categories
- [category] — [relationship]

### Potential Allies
- [company/community] — [why they benefit]

### Integration Partners
- [product/platform] — [complementary value]

### Category Feasibility (new category only)

| Factor | Status | Evidence |
|--------|--------|----------|
| Market timing | [status] | [evidence] |
| Resources | [status] | [evidence] |
| Buyer readiness | [status] | [evidence] |
| Competition response | [status] | [evidence] |
| Education cost | [status] | [evidence] |

## Implications for Positioning Synthesis

[How this category design analysis should influence the final positioning — what market category to declare, how to frame the category in messaging, and what POV narrative to lead with]

Task Classification

When this skill produces follow-up work, file it by execution semantics:

• Immediately actionable work goes in tasks/todo.md.
• Human-only external actions go in tasks/manual-todo.md with blocking/dependency annotations.
• Condition-gated records go in tasks/record-todo.md.
• Cadence-based reviews go in tasks/recurring-todo.md.

Constraints

• Intermediate artifact only. This produces research/positioning-category-design.md, not the canonical research/positioning.md.
• Honest about category creation costs. New categories require years of investment. Don't recommend lightly.
• POV must be bigger than the product. If the POV is just "our product is better," it's not a category POV.
• Naming requires validation. Don't recommend names without checking they're not already claimed.
• Present before writing. Never write output files until findings are validated.
• Category strategy must match resources. A bootstrapped startup cannot create a new category the same way a funded company can.

Alignment Page

When this skill produces durable deliverables, build a full-depth HTML alignment page following ../ALIGNMENT-PAGE.md in the parent skill's directory. Output: alignment/category-design-{topic}.html.

Default Shipping Contract

Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.