Gtm brief
Launch-stage skill: turns a feature plus its evidence into a GTM one-pager where every audience claim is tied to a stated source or labeled assumption. Use when a launch needs its go-to-market summarized on one page — 'draft the GTM one-pager', 'GTM brief for the launch', 'who are we selling this to and how', 'GTM summary for sales kickoff' — or when /pm routes such a request here. Do NOT use for full GTM strategy authoring, launch checklists (launch-checklist), announcements (announcement-drafter), or GTM definitions.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add Abhillashjadhav/PM-agent-OS --skill gtm-briefAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
5.0 KB, ~1.0k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
GTM Brief
One page on who buys and why — with every audience claim wearing its receipt or its [ASSUMPTION] label. Enthusiasm is not evidence.
Verification gates (defined first; output is blocked until all pass)
- G1 — Sourced or labeled, every audience claim: who wants this, what they'll pay, why now — each tied to a stated source from the input (sales notes, ticket export, win/loss doc) or carrying
[ASSUMPTION: … — validation step]. A bare audience claim fails. - G2 — Numbers reconcile: figures quoted from the input exactly (41 tickets is 41, or honestly "dozens" — never "hundreds"). Pre-launch metrics have no baselines; the brief says "none — pre-launch" instead of inventing one.
- G3 — Evidence-bounded scope: positioning targets only competitors the input evidences; channels are only the motions that exist; the brief names its own weakest evidence in one line.
Steps
- Inventory the evidence: every demand signal, loss reason, and customer fact in the input, with its source tag. This inventory is the universe claims may cite — the same rule as competitor-teardown's OBSERVED discipline, pointed at your own market.
- Read the signals honestly. 41 feature requests are demand for the capability, not proof of willingness to pay $10 — the brief keeps those separate, converting evidence gaps into labeled assumptions with validation steps ("attach-rate ≥15% [ASSUMPTION — measure in first 30 days]").
- Write the page: audience & evidence · problem & today's alternative · positioning (competitor named only with cited basis) · channels (stated motions only) · pricing (as decided) · success measures (metric + target-or-assumption + baseline-or-"none — pre-launch").
- Confess the weakest link. One line: the claim the launch most depends on with the least evidence behind it. Every honest GTM brief has one; a brief that doesn't is hiding it.
- Gate pass. Every audience claim sourced/labeled (G1), every figure reconciled against input (G2), scope bounded and weakest link present (G3). Fix and re-run; maximum 2 repair loops, then report the failure.
Output format
GTM BRIEF: AI meeting summaries — +$10/seat add-on
AUDIENCE: 10-50 seat agencies (our base skew [source: workspace data]) with active
demand signal: 41 'automatic recap' tickets YTD [source: tagged export], 3 enterprise
deals stalled on 'no AI features' [source: sales notes Q2]
PROBLEM & ALTERNATIVE: manual recaps post-call; losing 'AI-first' evaluations to
Fireflies [source: win/loss — 2 of 9 losses]
POSITIONING: summaries inside the scheduling flow they already use, vs. adding a
separate AI notetaker [basis: the win/loss pattern above]
CHANNELS: self-serve upgrade path + 4-person sales team on the 3 stalled deals [stated motions]
PRICING: +$10/seat (decided)
SUCCESS: attach rate ≥15% in 90 days [ASSUMPTION: no usage data pre-launch — measure
from day 1; baseline: none — pre-launch] · reopen 3 stalled deals [source: sales notes]
WEAKEST EVIDENCE: willingness to pay $10 — demand signals are feature requests, none
priced. Validate: first-30-day attach rate vs. the assumption above.
GATE CHECK: G1 pass (n/n sourced or labeled) · G2 pass · G3 pass
Hard rules
- No audience claim without a source tag or an ASSUMPTION label. "Customers consistently tell us…" requires the quotes to exist in the input.
- Demand evidence never silently becomes pricing evidence. Feature requests, stalled deals, and loss reasons each support exactly what they support.
- Never invent market stats, competitor claims, or baselines. Pre-launch means no usage numbers — the brief says so where a number would normally sit.
- The weakest-evidence line is mandatory. Selling the launch to your own team on hidden assumptions is how GTM briefs fail.
Limitations
- The brief is as good as the evidence inventory; signals the user didn't provide can't strengthen (or honestly weaken) it.
- Assumptions are labeled and paired with validation steps, but the brief doesn't run the validation — first-30-day data does.
- One page enforces selection: secondary audiences and channels are cut, not compressed; a multi-segment GTM needs one brief per segment.
- Positioning language here is strategic framing, not final copy — announcement-drafter owns the public words and its own overclaim gate.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.