Agent skill

problem-research

Research competitor pain points from review platforms (G2, Capterra, Reddit) to find wedge opportunities. SaaS/B2B focus. Use for market validation, competitive analysis, or deciding whether to build. Always concludes with brutally honest viability assessment.

Stars 163
Forks 31

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/development/problem-research

SKILL.md

Problem Research

Research competitor pain points from review platforms to identify market opportunities for SaaS/B2B products.

Overview

This skill analyzes reviews from G2, Capterra, TrustRadius, Reddit, and other platforms to extract:

  • Pain points - What users hate, churn reasons, broken features
  • Must-haves - Features users can't live without
  • Hidden gems - Underserved needs competitors ignore
  • Wedge opportunities - Where a newcomer can attack the market

Every report concludes with a brutally honest business viability assessment.

When to Use

  • Validating a new product idea before building
  • Finding entry points into competitive markets
  • Understanding why users switch from competitors
  • Identifying underserved needs and hidden opportunities
  • Deciding whether to pursue or abandon an idea

The Process

Phase 1: Collect Context

Gather from the user:

  • Target Product/Category: What you want to build (e.g., "CRM for agencies")
  • Industry/Vertical: B2B SaaS, E-commerce, Healthcare, etc.

Phase 2: Select Research Scope

Ask user to choose research depth:

Depth Competitors Est. Time Best For
Light (default) 3-5 top players 5-10 min Quick validation, early ideation
Medium 5-10 competitors 15-25 min Market entry research
Deep 10+ competitors 30-45 min Comprehensive competitive intelligence

Phase 3: Select Execution Mode

Ask user which execution approach to use:

A) Semi-Automated (WebSearch + WebFetch)

  • Faster, more reliable
  • Searches review aggregator summaries and accessible pages
  • May miss some nuanced quotes
  • Works without additional setup
  • Recommended for most use cases

B) Agentic Browsing (Browser MCP)

  • Slower, more thorough
  • Navigates actual review sites interactively
  • Captures exact quotes with full context
  • Requires Chrome with CDP enabled
  • Use when exact quotes are critical for sales copy

Phase 4: Execute Research

Track progress via TodoWrite through these steps:

  1. Identify top competitors - Find 3-10 players based on scope
  2. Analyze review platforms - G2, Capterra, TrustRadius per competitor
  3. Process Reddit discussions - r/[industry], relevant subreddits
  4. Extract pain points - Categorize and score each complaint
  5. Identify must-haves - Features that are table stakes
  6. Find hidden gems - Underserved needs no one addresses
  7. Synthesize findings - Rank and prioritize insights

Phase 5: Generate Report

Produce the structured report (see Output Format below):

  • Executive Summary
  • Pain Points Table (ranked with quotes)
  • Must-Haves Table
  • Hidden Gems
  • Opportunity Map
  • Viability Assessment (verdict + brutal truth)

Phase 6: Save Options

Ask user via AskUserQuestion:

  • Display only (default) - Already shown
  • Save to file - Save as docs/research/[date]-[topic]-problem-research.md

Research Sources

Primary Sources (Priority Order)

Platform Strengths Search Pattern
G2 Structured likes/dislikes, verified users, company size data "[competitor]" site:g2.com reviews
Capterra Large volume, verified buyers, detailed pros/cons "[competitor]" site:capterra.com reviews
TrustRadius In-depth tradeoffs section, enterprise focus "[competitor]" site:trustradius.com
Reddit Authentic, unfiltered, real frustration "[competitor]" site:reddit.com (frustrated OR hate OR switching)
GetApp SMB focus, similar to Capterra "[competitor]" site:getapp.com reviews

Search Query Templates

# Pain-focused searches
"[competitor name]" reviews "what I dislike"
"[competitor name]" vs "looking for alternative"
"switching from [competitor]" OR "left [competitor]"
"[competitor name]" frustrated OR annoying OR terrible

# Feature-focused searches
"[competitor name]" "can't live without"
"[competitor name]" "favorite feature"
"best thing about [competitor name]"

Scoring Frameworks

Pain Point Score (PPS)

PPS = Frequency Score × Severity Score × Recency Multiplier

Frequency Score (1-5):

Score Mentions Interpretation
1 1-2 Isolated complaint
2 3-5 Notable pattern
3 6-10 Common issue
4 11-20 Widespread problem
5 20+ Systemic failure

Severity Score (1-4):

Score Level Signal Words
1 Annoyance "wish," "minor," "sometimes"
2 Friction "frustrating," "annoying," "confusing"
3 Blocker "can't," "impossible," "forced to"
4 Dealbreaker "leaving," "nightmare," "unacceptable"

Recency Multiplier:

Multiplier Timeframe Rationale
0.5 >2 years old Possibly fixed
1.0 Mixed recency Standard weight
1.5 Mostly <6 months Active problem

PPS Range: 0.5 to 30

  • Critical (20-30): Solve this, win the market
  • High (10-19): Strong opportunity
  • Medium (5-9): Worth considering
  • Low (<5): Nice-to-have territory

Hidden Gem Score

Hidden Gem Score = Pain Frequency × Competitor Gap Score

Competitor Gap Score (0-5):

Score Coverage
0 All major competitors have it
3 Few competitors address it
5 No competitor addresses it

Viability Scorecard (30 max)

Factor What to Look For Score
Market Pain Severity Emotional language, switching behavior 1-5
Willingness to Pay Price complaints (good!), "worth any price" 1-5
Competitor Vulnerability Ignored complaints, stale products, acquisitions 1-5
Switching Cost Reality Data portability, "stuck with" comments 1-5
Market Timing Recent pricing changes, feature removal, windows 1-5
Differentiation Potential Can you solve 1 thing 10x better? 1-5

See references/scoring-rubrics.md for detailed scoring criteria.


Viability Verdicts

GO (25-30)

Strong opportunity. Clear pain, achievable solution, winnable market.

PROCEED WITH CAUTION (18-24)

Opportunity exists but validate further. Address specific risks identified.

RECONSIDER (12-17)

Significant risks. Consider pivoting focus or target segment.

NO-GO (6-11)

Do not pursue without fundamental changes to the approach.


Brutal Honesty Framework

Every report must answer these questions honestly:

  1. What would make this fail completely?
  2. Why hasn't someone already solved this?
  3. What are you not seeing that incumbents see?
  4. Is this a vitamin or a painkiller?
  5. If built perfectly, would anyone actually switch?
  6. What's your unfair advantage in solving this?

No sugar-coating. No wishful thinking. Data-backed brutal truth.


Output Format

Target length: 1,500-2,500 words (substantial but scannable)

See references/output-template.md for the complete template.

Quick Reference

markdown
# Problem Research: [Category]
**Industry:** [Vertical] | **Competitors:** [Count] | **Date:** [YYYY-MM-DD]

## Executive Summary
[3-4 sentences: Top pain, biggest opportunity, verdict]

## Pain Points Table
| Rank | Pain Point | Freq | Severity | PPS | Sample Quote |
|------|------------|------|----------|-----|--------------|

## Must-Haves Table
| Must-Have | Coverage | Why Non-Negotiable |
|-----------|----------|---------------------|

## Hidden Gems
### Gem 1: [Underserved Need]
- **Evidence:** [Quote]
- **Why ignored:** [Hypothesis]
- **Opportunity:** [S/M/L]

## Opportunity Map
| Wedge | Target | Pain Solved | Defensibility |
|-------|--------|-------------|---------------|

## Viability Assessment
**VERDICT: [GO / PROCEED WITH CAUTION / RECONSIDER / NO-GO]**

### The Brutal Truth
[Unflinching analysis]

### Red Flags / Green Lights
### If You Proceed / Kill Criteria

## Data Sources
| Source | Competitors | Reviews |
|--------|-------------|---------|

Pain Point Categories

When categorizing pain points, use these standard categories:

  1. UX/Usability - Interface complexity, learning curve, navigation
  2. Performance - Speed, reliability, uptime, latency
  3. Features - Missing capabilities, limited functionality
  4. Pricing - Cost, value perception, billing issues, hidden fees
  5. Support - Response time, quality, availability
  6. Reliability - Bugs, crashes, data loss, inconsistency
  7. Integration - API limitations, third-party connections
  8. Onboarding - Setup difficulty, documentation, training
  9. Mobile - Mobile app quality, cross-device experience
  10. Reporting - Data visibility, export limitations, analytics

Key Principles

  • Evidence over opinion: Every insight backed by real quotes
  • Frequency matters: Weight by how often something appears
  • Sentiment context: Note the emotion, not just the complaint
  • Segment awareness: Note if pain is specific to SMB/Enterprise/Industry
  • Brutal honesty: The viability assessment pulls no punches
  • Actionable output: Everything leads to go/no-go decisions

Example Invocations

bash
# Full interactive session
skill problem-research

# With initial context
skill problem-research "Project management software for marketing teams"

# Specific competitor focus
skill problem-research "CRM alternatives to Salesforce for SMBs"

Quick Start

  1. User provides target category/product
  2. Select research scope (Light/Medium/Deep)
  3. Select execution mode (Semi-automated/Agentic browsing)
  4. Research executes with TodoWrite progress tracking
  5. Report generated with all sections
  6. User chooses save option

Skill Status: Complete

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results