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

# 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

# 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