Marketplace

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.

allowed_tools: Read, Write, Edit, WebSearch, WebFetch, AskUserQuestion, TodoWrite, mcp__browsermcp__*

$ 安裝

git clone https://github.com/majesticlabs-dev/majestic-marketplace /tmp/majestic-marketplace && cp -r /tmp/majestic-marketplace/plugins/majestic-company/skills/problem-research ~/.claude/skills/majestic-marketplace

// tip: Run this command in your terminal to install the skill


name: problem-research description: 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. allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, WebSearch, WebFetch, AskUserQuestion, TodoWrite, mcp__browsermcp__*

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:

DepthCompetitorsEst. TimeBest For
Light (default)3-5 top players5-10 minQuick validation, early ideation
Medium5-10 competitors15-25 minMarket entry research
Deep10+ competitors30-45 minComprehensive 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)

PlatformStrengthsSearch Pattern
G2Structured likes/dislikes, verified users, company size data"[competitor]" site:g2.com reviews
CapterraLarge volume, verified buyers, detailed pros/cons"[competitor]" site:capterra.com reviews
TrustRadiusIn-depth tradeoffs section, enterprise focus"[competitor]" site:trustradius.com
RedditAuthentic, unfiltered, real frustration"[competitor]" site:reddit.com (frustrated OR hate OR switching)
GetAppSMB 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):

ScoreMentionsInterpretation
11-2Isolated complaint
23-5Notable pattern
36-10Common issue
411-20Widespread problem
520+Systemic failure

Severity Score (1-4):

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

Recency Multiplier:

MultiplierTimeframeRationale
0.5>2 years oldPossibly fixed
1.0Mixed recencyStandard weight
1.5Mostly <6 monthsActive 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):

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

Viability Scorecard (30 max)

FactorWhat to Look ForScore
Market Pain SeverityEmotional language, switching behavior1-5
Willingness to PayPrice complaints (good!), "worth any price"1-5
Competitor VulnerabilityIgnored complaints, stale products, acquisitions1-5
Switching Cost RealityData portability, "stuck with" comments1-5
Market TimingRecent pricing changes, feature removal, windows1-5
Differentiation PotentialCan 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

Repository

majesticlabs-dev
majesticlabs-dev
Author
majesticlabs-dev/majestic-marketplace/plugins/majestic-company/skills/problem-research
13
Stars
0
Forks
Updated4d ago
Added1w ago