# Positioning > Guide founders and teams through a structured positioning statement exercise. Combines competitive research, strategic questioning, and team alignment to produce a sharp, honest positioning statement. Use when a company needs to define who they are, what they offer, and why anyone should care. Use when this capability is needed. - Skill: `tomevault-io/positioning` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/positioning` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/positioning/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Marketing & Growth - Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/positioning --- # Positioning Skill Structured positioning statement exercise for startups and teams. Combines deep competitive research with forced-choice strategic questions to produce an honest, compressed positioning statement. Designed for accelerator portfolio companies, internal use, or any team that can't answer "why us?" in one sentence. ## Philosophy Most positioning exercises produce corporate fluff because they skip the hard questions. This skill forces honesty by: - Researching competitors BEFORE asking questions (so you can't hide from reality) - Making every question a forced choice (no "all of the above") - Requiring the team to write independently, then collide answers - Compressing the final output to under 30 words The output is not marketing copy. It's a strategic alignment tool. ## Workflow ### PHASE 1: Context gathering **Action:** Use `AskUserQuestion` to collect basic info. ``` Questions: 1. "What does the company do? (2-3 sentences, plain language)" - Free text 2. "Who is the target customer today?" - Free text 3. "What stage? What's the team size?" - Options: [Pre-seed solo/duo, Pre-seed with team (3-8), Seed, Series A+] 4. "Is there an existing website, pitch deck, or memo I should read?" - Free text (URLs or file paths) ``` **If the user provides a file path or URL:** Read it. Extract product description, claimed differentiators, current messaging, pricing, and team. ### PHASE 2: Competitive research **Action:** Before launching research, detect available research tools by calling `ListMcpResourcesTool` or checking which MCP tools are available. Build a tool instruction block based on what's present. **Tool detection priority (check in order, use all that are available):** | MCP Tool Pattern | What it provides | How to use | |---|---|---| | `mcp__perplexity__perplexity_research` | Deep multi-source research | Use for the primary competitive landscape query | | `mcp__perplexity__perplexity_search` | Fast web-grounded search | Use for quick competitor lookups | | `mcp__exa__web_search_exa` | Semantic web search | Use for finding similar/adjacent companies | | `mcp__parallel-search__web_search_preview` | Parallel web search | Use for batch competitor searches | | `mcp__parallel-task__createDeepResearch` | Analyst-grade research reports | Use for deep competitor analysis | | `mcp__firecrawl__firecrawl_search` | Web search + scraping | Use for competitor website analysis | | `WebSearch` (built-in) | Basic web search | Always available as fallback | | `WebFetch` (built-in) | Fetch URL content | Always available as fallback | **Compose the research tool instructions dynamically.** For example: - If Perplexity is available: "Use `mcp__perplexity__perplexity_research` for the main competitive landscape query, then `WebFetch` to verify specific competitor websites." - If Exa is available: "Use `mcp__exa__web_search_exa` for semantic search to find companies similar to [description]." - If nothing extra is available: "Use `WebSearch` for competitor queries and `WebFetch` on each competitor's website." **Launch 2 parallel agents with the detected tools:** **Agent 1: Direct competitors** ``` Launch an Agent (general-purpose) with this prompt: Research the competitive landscape for: [company description from Phase 1]. [INSERT DETECTED TOOL INSTRUCTIONS — tell the agent exactly which tools to use] Find: 1. The 3-5 closest competitors (same customer, same problem) 2. For each: one-liner positioning, pricing, key differentiator, weakness 3. What do ALL of them say? (common claims = table stakes, not differentiators) 4. What does NONE of them say? (potential white space) Output as a markdown table + 3 bullet summary. ``` **Agent 2: Adjacent/aspirational competitors** ``` Launch an Agent (general-purpose) with this prompt: Research companies adjacent to: [company description from Phase 1]. [INSERT DETECTED TOOL INSTRUCTIONS] Find: 1. 2-3 companies solving a related problem for the same customer 2. 2-3 companies solving the same problem for a different customer 3. Any company that this team might secretly aspire to be (the "we're like X but for Y" reference) For each: one-liner, why they matter as context. ``` **Launch both agents in parallel.** The skill works with just built-in WebSearch/WebFetch but produces richer research when Perplexity, Exa, or other research MCPs are configured. **After agents return:** Present findings to user as a compact summary. Ask: ``` AskUserQuestion: - "Anything missing or wrong in this competitive picture?" Options: [Looks right, Let me add/correct] - "Which competitor do founders most often compare you to?" Free text ``` ### PHASE 3: The four questions **Action:** Present the four positioning questions using `AskUserQuestion`. Each question is informed by the competitive research. **IMPORTANT:** Frame questions using SPECIFIC competitor names and findings from Phase 2. Do not use generic placeholders. --- **Q1: The founder/customer test** ``` header: "The customer test" question: | Your ideal customer is evaluating you against [TOP COMPETITOR 1] and [TOP COMPETITOR 2]. They can only pick one. Why do they pick you? Rules: - Don't say "price" or "we're cheaper" - Don't say "better technology" without specifics - Don't say "customer service" (everyone says this) options: - [Generate 3-4 options based on research findings, each representing a distinct strategic direction] - "Something else (write your own)" ``` **Q2: The honest gap** ``` header: "The honest gap" question: | What is the single biggest reason your ideal customer says NO today? Be specific. Not "we're early stage" — that's a cop-out. options: - [Generate 3-4 options based on competitive weaknesses found in research] - "Something else (write your own)" ``` **Q3: The core bet** ``` header: "The core bet" question: | You can only invest in ONE of these directions for the next 6 months. Which one? options: - [Generate 3-4 options based on the white space found in research, each with a 1-sentence description of what it means concretely] - "Something else (write your own)" ``` **Q4: Market scope** ``` header: "Market scope" question: | Which market are you actually in? Pick the one that defines your roadmap. options: - [Generate 3-4 market definitions from narrow to broad, based on the company's product and competitive research. Example: "Smart contract security for Solidity only" vs "AI code security for all languages" vs "Critical infrastructure verification"] ``` **Q5: Your first draft** After the four questions, immediately ask: ``` AskUserQuestion: - "Now write your positioning statement. Under 30 words. Don't overthink it — gut reaction based on what you just answered." Template: We help [WHO] achieve [WHAT] through [HOW], unlike [ALTERNATIVE]. Free text ``` **Do not skip this.** Save the user's draft verbatim. In Phase 6, show it side-by-side with the final synthesized version and call out what changed and why. ### PHASE 4: Team collection **Action:** After the user completes all five questions, generate the team exercise. Output a clean markdown block that the user can copy-paste to their team: ```markdown # Positioning Exercise — [Company Name] Answer each question independently. Don't discuss with teammates first. Spend max 10 minutes total. Gut reactions > polished answers. ## 1. The customer test [Customized question with competitor names from research] ## 2. The honest gap [Customized question] ## 3. The core bet [Customized question with forced-choice options] ## 4. Market scope [Customized question with scope options] ## 5. Positioning statement Fill in, keep under 30 words: We help [WHO] achieve [WHAT] through [HOW], unlike [ALTERNATIVE]. --- Return all answers to [user name] by [user specifies deadline]. ``` Then ask: ``` AskUserQuestion: - "Send this to your team and paste all their replies here when you have them. How many people will respond?" Free text ``` ### PHASE 5: Synthesis **Action:** When user pastes team replies, analyze them. **Analysis structure:** 1. **Alignment map** — Where does everyone agree? (These are real. Use them.) 2. **Contradiction map** — Where do people disagree? (These are the strategic decisions that need to be made.) 3. **Surprise findings** — Anything one person said that nobody else did but is clearly right. 4. **Gap analysis** — Questions nobody answered well (signals the team hasn't thought this through). Present this analysis, then ask: ``` AskUserQuestion: - "For each contradiction, which direction do you want to go?" [Present each contradiction as a forced binary choice] ``` ### PHASE 6: Final positioning statement **Action:** Generate the combined positioning statement. **Output format:** ```markdown # [Company Name] — Positioning Statement ## The customer test [2-3 sentences. Lead with the answer. No fluff.] ## The honest gap [1-2 sentences. Brutally honest.] ## The core bet [2-3 sentences. What you're building, what exists today vs. planned.] ## Market scope [1 sentence. The market you chose and what it excludes.] ## Positioning statement [Under 30 words. Fill in the template:] We help [WHO] achieve [WHAT] through [HOW], unlike [ALTERNATIVE]. ## Your first draft vs. final > **Your draft:** [user's verbatim draft from Phase 3 Q5] > **Final:** [synthesized version above] > **What changed:** [1-2 sentences on what shifted and why — e.g. "You led with technology, the team led with outcome. The final version centers the customer problem."] ``` **Quality rules for final output:** - No sentence over 20 words - No adjectives that can't be verified (remove "innovative", "cutting-edge", "world-class", "unique") - Every claim must be either (a) already true or (b) explicitly marked as a bet - If something is aspirational, say "By [date], we plan to..." — not "We are..." - Total length: under 200 words for all sections combined **Save to:** Ask the user where they'd like to save the output. ### PHASE 7: Iteration (optional) If user wants to iterate, use `AskUserQuestion` to identify which section needs work. Re-run only that section's question with tighter constraints. ## Anti-patterns to avoid - **Don't generate positioning without research.** The competitive context is what makes questions sharp. - **Don't let the user skip the team exercise.** Solo positioning statements are echo chambers. - **Don't use marketing language.** If it sounds like it belongs on a SaaS landing page, rewrite it. - **Don't accept "all of the above" answers.** Force choices. The pain of choosing IS the exercise. - **Don't make the final statement longer than 30 words.** Compression is clarity. --- > Source: [Gerstep/positioning-plugin](https://github.com/Gerstep/positioning-plugin) — distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io).