---
name: enterprise-icp
description: Enterprise multi-stakeholder discovery — map personas, deal-killers, and the evaluation-to-renewal lifecycle
type: research
version: v0.0
argument-hint: "[optional: target industry or market segment]"
---

## Pack Availability Guard

Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check `.agents/project.json.enabled_packs`. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend `$pack install <pack>` instead of the target skill. Global skills are always valid. Skills from this same pack are valid because the current skill is already running from that pack.

# Enterprise ICP — Multi-Stakeholder Discovery Interview

Invoke as `$enterprise-icp`.

## Report-First Approval Gate

Default to report-only: present findings, evidence coverage, assumptions, recommended artifact path, and proposed file changes in a pre-approval alignment page plus a concise conversation summary for user approval before creating or updating canonical research, spec, or task files.

Do not write or overwrite synthesized deliverables until the user explicitly approves, unless the user invoked an explicit write/update/fix mode or clearly asked to write files upfront. Raw evidence capture may be persisted before analysis when reproducibility requires it; report those raw paths separately and still gate synthesized research/report writes.

When stopping for approval, build and attempt to open the alignment preview page first, then ask the user to review it and approve, question, or request adjustments. Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstream routing language. The approval request itself is the next action. Only emit next-skill routing after the approved artifact has been written or updated.

Research-first mapping of the enterprise problem space. Enterprise sales involve multiple stakeholders, each with their own journey and deal-killing "no."

## Workflow

### 0. App Scope Resolution (Monorepo Support)

Before checking prerequisites, determine the app scope:

1. If `$ARGUMENTS` specifies an app name matching a subdirectory of `research/`, use it.
2. If `research/` contains subdirectories (excluding files), list them and ask the user which app to target. If the session is already in Plan mode and there are 2-3 concrete choices, prefer `request_user_input`; otherwise ask in plain text. If only one subdirectory exists, use it automatically.
3. If no subdirectories exist, proceed with flat structure (single-product mode).

When app scope `{app}` is active:
- Read/write research from `research/{app}/` instead of `research/`
- Read/write specs from `specs/{app}/` instead of `specs/`
- Also read `research/icp.md` (cross-app overview) for broader context

1. Read `research/icp.md` (or `research/{app}/icp.md`) if it exists as a starting point. Read the codebase if one exists. Before asking the user how enterprise differs, use WebSearch to research enterprise buying patterns in this product category (e.g., "[category] enterprise buying process", "[category] enterprise vs SMB"). Present the startup ICP summary alongside enterprise research findings, then ask how enterprise differs.
2. Interview the user one primary decision question per turn by default. Use short follow-up bullets only when they clarify the same enterprise ICP decision, not to batch unrelated questions. Research and recommend by default: assume the user has no insider knowledge unless they explicitly provide it; present findings with data, define relevant terms, state a recommendation, and ask for hard constraints, proprietary facts, or corrections; only ask without a recommendation when evidence cannot resolve the choice. Cover:
   - **Stakeholder Map** — Which personas matter? End users, team admin, IT/Security, procurement, champion (see Champion Enablement & Risk for deep analysis), exec sponsor
   - **Per-Persona Journeys** — What each stakeholder needs to see/do/approve; their deal-killing "no"
   - **Enterprise Lifecycle** — Evaluation → pilot → rollout → expansion → renewal requirements
   - **Deal-Killer Requirements** — SSO/SAML, SOC 2, GDPR, HIPAA, audit logs, data residency, RBAC, SLAs
   - **Onboarding Complexity** — Self-serve, team, SSO-provisioned, migration, training needs
   - **Enterprise Value Prop** — How value shifts from startup, ROI story, platform positioning
   - **Champion Enablement & Risk** — Champion identification (role, motivations), enablement toolkit (ROI calculator, case studies, exec summary deck), risk assessment (single-champion dependency, mitigation), multi-champion strategy, champion-to-executive bridge, post-sale champion role
   - **Budget Cycle & Procurement** — Budget cycle timing, budget source (IT/departmental/innovation/exec), procurement path (vendor registration, RFP, security questionnaire, legal, MSA), pricing expectations, competitive displacement
   - **Land-and-Expand Strategy** — Initial landing zone (smallest deployable unit), expansion triggers, expansion mechanics, expansion blockers, account growth trajectory (Year 1 → Year 2 → Year 3)
   - **Enterprise Segmentation** — Segment definitions (mid-market, large enterprise, strategic/Global 2000), segment differences (buying process, stakeholders, deal size), target segment priority, segment-specific deal-killers. Conditional — include only if product serves multiple enterprise tiers.
   > Areas G-J (Champion, Budget, Land-and-Expand, Segmentation) often surface together in conversation. Let answers inform nearby areas, but keep Codex follow-up questions one primary decision at a time.
3. **Present findings before writing.** Summarise with evidence: stakeholder map (citing interview responses and research data), critical deal-killers (citing competitor requirements, industry standards, or research findings), lifecycle friction points (citing specific examples or research findings), and key insights. Ask: "Which enterprise constraints, missing stakeholders, or weak assumptions should change this analysis?" Continue with follow-up questions until all non-trivial details are nailed down.
4. Only after user confirms, write the output files.

## Deliverables

- `research/enterprise-icp.md` (or `research/{app}/enterprise-icp.md`) — Stakeholder map, per-persona journeys, enterprise lifecycle (with expansion stage), deal-killers, onboarding matrix, enterprise value prop, champion enablement & risk, budget cycle & procurement, land-and-expand strategy, enterprise segmentation (conditional), next steps
- `research/enterprise-icp-interview.md` (or `research/{app}/enterprise-icp-interview.md`) — Raw interview log

The output file must end with a `## Next Steps` section with a **Recommended** item and **Other options** (2–4 alternatives). Use this format in the output:

## Next Steps

**Recommended:** [recommended skill] — [one-line reason why this is the highest-impact next action given current state]

Other options:
- `$skill` — [description]
- ...

**Recommendation priority** (first applicable becomes the recommendation):
1. IF codebase exists: recommend `$scale-audit` — evaluate whether the codebase meets enterprise deal-killer requirements
2. Otherwise: recommend `$journey-map enterprise` — map the multi-stakeholder journey before building

**Other options** (include all applicable items not chosen as recommended, based on which files exist):
- IF codebase exists: `$scale-audit` — Evaluate codebase against enterprise requirements
- `$spec-interview enterprise [feature]` — Validate the riskiest enterprise assumption (if enterprise specs exist)
- `$journey-map enterprise` — Map enterprise stakeholder journeys (if no `research/journey-map.md`)
- `$journey-map` — Map general user journeys (if no `research/journey-map.md` and `research/icp.md` exists)
- `$competitive-analysis` — Research enterprise competitive landscape (if no `research/competitive-analysis.md`)

## Task Classification

When this skill produces follow-up work, file it by execution semantics:

- Immediately actionable implementation or documentation work goes in `tasks/todo.md`.
- Human-only external actions tied to automated steps go in `tasks/manual-todo.md` with `_(blocks: Step N.X)_` or `_(after: Step N.X)_`; repo edits, SDK wiring, generated assets, local commands, tests, audits, and authenticated CLI/API work stay in `tasks/todo.md`.
- One-time condition-gated records, baselines, or future measurements go in `tasks/record-todo.md` with source, condition, non-blocking reason, evidence, and promotion rule.
- Cadence-based reviews, playtests, adoption checks, investor updates, retros, or docs-health checks go in `tasks/recurring-todo.md` with cadence, owner/agent, next due, evidence path, and escalation conditions.
- Do not put non-blocking records or recurring obligations in `tasks/todo.md` unless they have been explicitly promoted into current execution work.

## Constraints

- Stay in problem space — do not prescribe solutions.
- Do not assume enterprise ICP is startup ICP scaled up — explicitly explore what changes.
- Continue until all 10 areas are covered.
- Do not overwrite existing `research/enterprise-icp.md` (or `research/{app}/enterprise-icp.md`) without asking the user first.
- Present before writing — never write until findings are validated.
- `## Next Steps` must be the final section in the output file, with a recommended next step and 2–4 other options.

## Alignment Page

When this skill produces durable deliverables (research, specs, plans, reports, prototypes, or any document output), build a full-depth HTML alignment page at `alignment/enterprise-icp-{topic}.html`. Use a normalized topic slug derived from the app, feature, research subject, report subject, or output filename.

**Full content requirement.** The alignment page must contain the complete content of every proposed markdown deliverable -- every section, every finding, every detail, every list item. It is a thorough interactive review document, not a summary. Render the full deliverable content in clean, readable HTML with appropriate hierarchy, styling, and navigation. If the skill writes multiple scoped deliverables in one run, build one alignment page that contains all deliverables with anchor-linked navigation. Durable tracker artifacts, such as `research/assumption-tracker.md`, remain canonical markdown outputs but must also be fully rendered into the alignment page before approval.

**Dark-mode styling.** Use a dark color scheme by default. Base CSS variables: `--bg: #0d1117; --surface: #161b22; --border: #30363d; --text: #c9d1d9; --text-muted: #8b949e; --accent: #58a6ff; --green: #3fb950; --red: #f85149; --orange: #d29922; --purple: #bc8cff;`. Apply `background: var(--bg); color: var(--text);` on body. Use `--surface` for cards, nav, and table headers. Use `--border` for all borders. Use `--purple` for question blocks and gate headings. Use `--accent` for links and section headings. Keep headings `color: #fff` or `var(--accent)` for hierarchy. Question block backgrounds should use `#1c2333`.

**Alignment gates.** Treat gates as explicit review sections inside the HTML page. A gate blocks finalization until its required inline questions are answered and compiled into YAML. Include every gate that applies to the skill output, and include these gate types whenever relevant: evidence coverage, assumptions/confidence, scope/non-goals, candidate/verdict decisions, artifact destination, proposed file changes, coverage checkpoint, and post-approval route.

**Report-only research gates.** For report-only or pre-approval research skills, the alignment page must explicitly contain evidence coverage, assumptions/confidence, recommended path, proposed file changes, and approval gates before any canonical research, spec, or task file is created or updated.


**Required inline questions.** Each gate must contain at least one required inline question placed directly under the content it governs, inside a visually distinct question block. Each question must use radio-button inputs and include two standing options after the skill-generated choices: "Other / None of the above" backed by a multi-line text box for free-form input, and "Need clarification" backed by an optional notes box where the user can explain what is unclear. When any radio option other than "Other" or "Need clarification" is selected, show an optional "Additional notes" text box beneath it so the user can qualify their choice. Generate questions based on what genuinely needs user input -- do not add filler questions. Do not create a separate bottom "Decisions & Clarifications" section.

**Gate YAML contract.** At the bottom of the page, include a "Compile Answers" button that aggregates answers from all inline gate questions throughout the page, including free-text notes. The button remains disabled until every required question has a selection, shows a count of remaining unanswered questions, and scrolls to the first unanswered question if clicked early. When every question is answered, generate a structured YAML block with one item per gate answer using this stable shape: `section`, `gate_type`, `status` (`answered`, `other`, or `needs-clarification`), `answer`, optional `notes`, and optional `target_artifact` or `target_path` when the gate controls file output. Display the YAML in a read-only, click-to-copy textarea.

**Pre-approval stop.** Before user approval, the next action is review of the HTML alignment page, not downstream routing. Ask the user to review the page and provide the compiled YAML answers. Do not include `Recommended next skill`, `Recommended next command`, or downstream routing language until after compiled YAML has been provided and the approved artifacts have been written or updated.

**Diff highlighting on updates.** When the agent updates an existing alignment page after receiving compiled answers, highlight what changed since the previous version. The agent chooses inline annotation or side-by-side layout per situation.

**Archiving.** Before replacing an existing alignment page, archive it to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/alignment/enterprise-icp-{topic}.html`.

**Browser open.** Attempt to open the resulting HTML page in the browser and report whether the open succeeded or was blocked. A blocked browser-open attempt does not make the skill fail when the files were written correctly.

## Archive-First Replacement Policy

- Before replacing or substantively rewriting an existing canonical research/spec document (`research/**/*.md`, `specs/**/*.md`, or `docs/specifications/**/*.md`), copy the current file to `docs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-relative-path>`.
- Preserve the archived snapshot exactly as it existed before the change; do not edit the archived copy after creating it.
- After the archive snapshot exists, write the updated document to the original canonical path.
- Report both the archive path and the updated canonical path in the final output.
- New files do not need archive snapshots. Append-only updates do not need archive snapshots unless an existing section is regenerated or rewritten.
- Keep any existing user approval requirement before overwriting or replacing a document; archiving does not replace asking when the skill already requires approval.

## Default Shipping Contract

- **Default next-step routing:** when reporting completion, include either `Recommended next skill: <command>` or the two-line pair `**Next work:** <specific task or "none">` and `**Recommended next command:** <one command or route>` so the next operator has a concrete handoff.
- If this skill creates or modifies tracked repository files, finish by committing and pushing all intended changes to the repository primary branch (`main` when present, otherwise `master`) before stopping, even if the user did not explicitly ask for commit/push.
- Do not leave tracked changes or unpushed commits behind. If unrelated tracked work is already present, either include it in sensible commits too or stop and explain the blocker.
- This contract does not override stricter safety rules about secrets, destructive history changes, release publication/tag confirmation, or production deploy confirmation.
