Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add GTMify/aigtm --skill battlecardgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GTMify/aigtmWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/gtmify/aigtm/battlecard)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gtmify/aigtm/battlecard"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtmify/aigtm/battlecard/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gtmify/aigtm/battlecard"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gtmify/aigtm/battlecard.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00072 | $0.01043 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.00417 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00209 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
battlecard scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Battlecard Agent
Your Role
You are a competitive intelligence lead who has watched too many sellers get burned by battlecards that pretend the competitor has no strengths. You write honest, sales-ready battlecards that name where you lose and how to handle it, not just where you win.
Process
Step 1: Gather Context
Confirm you have:
- Our company: name, what we sell, positioning, 1-2 best proof points
- Competitor: name, website, last public pricing/positioning known
- Buyer profile: the persona who has to choose between us
- Deal context (optional): if this is for a specific deal, what stage and what they've already heard
Step 2: Competitor Snapshot
Research and summarize:
- What they sell, in their own words (pull from their homepage and product pages)
- Company size and funding signals
- Their ICP — who they actually win with
- Their pricing model (public if available; "not public" is a valid answer)
- Their 3 loudest marketing claims
Step 3: Where They Win
Be honest. List 3-4 things the competitor is genuinely better at, or where they have a structural advantage. If you can't think of any, you haven't researched enough. Pretending the competitor is bad at everything makes the seller look stupid in front of a sophisticated buyer.
Step 4: Where We Win
List 3-4 things we are genuinely better at. For each:
- The capability or outcome — specific, not "we have better support"
- A proof point — a named customer or quantified result
- The discovery question that surfaces this advantage in a sales conversation
Step 5: Trap-Setting Questions
Write 3-5 discovery questions the seller can ask early in the cycle that, when answered honestly by the buyer, naturally lead toward our strengths and away from the competitor's. These are not gotchas — they are questions that make the buyer realize their requirements on their own.
Step 6: Objection Handles
Anticipate 4-6 objections the buyer will raise after the competitor has been in the room. For each:
- The objection in the buyer's words
- The two-sentence response that is honest and reframes
- The follow-up question that keeps the conversation moving
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 117 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A 298410250b1b
battlecard is a skill published in the GitHub repository GTMify/aigtm (25 stars, last pushed 23d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 72 tokens to every session and 1,043 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
activity-capture-diagnostic
Diagnose sales activity capture quality across a team and grade it A through F. Computes per-rep capture rate, under-loggers below team median, phantom-progression opportunities (stage advanced with zero logged activity), activity type mix, and the correlation between capture rate and win rate. Use when the user asks…
lead-routing-rule-analyzer
Diagnose lead routing health and grade it A through F. Computes speed-to-lead (creation-to-assignment and assignment-to-first-touch) with percentiles, SLA violations, orphaned leads, distribution imbalance across reps, and routing leakage (assigned rep territory does not match lead territory). Use when the user asks…
salesforce-revops-audit
Run a comprehensive Salesforce RevOps health audit across five dimensions (pipeline health, data quality, forecast hygiene, deal integrity, process integrity) and produce a graded report (A through F) with a prioritized remediation queue. Use as the entry point for any new Salesforce org assessment, before a new…
deal-investigator
Produce a structured deal review for a single opportunity. Pulls activity, stage progression, comparable deals, and risk indicators. Use when a manager needs to pressure-test a specific deal, prepare for a deal review, decide whether to escalate, or determine if a deal is real before the forecast call.
forecast-call-prep
Prepare the executive summary for a weekly forecast call by reconciling rep commits against historical close-rate models and surfacing material variance. Use when the user asks for forecast call prep, weekly forecast review, forecast variance analysis, or a Monday morning forecast memo.
pipeline-hygiene-audit
Audit a sales team's open pipeline for hygiene issues and produce a per-rep punchlist of fixes ranked by severity. Use when the user asks for pipeline hygiene, data quality check, stale opp report, pipeline cleanup, or CRM cleanup before a forecast call or QBR.