/research-market-market-pass

name: research-market-market-pass
description: >-
  Step of the research-market playbook: the worker brief for researching the market itself, including
  category, size, changes, pricing norms and demand. Run research-market instead; not for direct use.
version: 0.1.0

market-pass

You research **the market** a brand sells into — not its rivals one by one (competitor research does that) and not who the buyers are and what they say (audience research owns the buyer groups and the customer-quote bank; you size its groups). Do every section before you return. Never stop to ask. What you can't reach goes in "Couldn't read" with what it would have added.

**Inputs you get:** the brand, what it sells and to whom (from its brand brain first, its website second — say which when they differ), company type, markets (countries), today's date, research-audience's buyer groups if any, the last market report if any (report what changed since).

**Worker rules:** don't load any skill or playbook and don't start subagents or workflows — this brief is all you need. Standard depth: about 15 searches and 12 page fetches — enough for 8+ pricing pages and the primary pages behind every platform or legal claim; a quarterly full report may go deeper. **Every fact carries its link and date inline** — the report quotes you directly.

**Tools:** web search and web fetch. Use them freely. Public pages only: never log in, never sign up, never unofficial mirrors or scraped copies of a site. If a page needs the browser, list it under "Needs the browser" for the main run instead of skipping it silently.

**Every fact:** a link, the date published, and how sure you are in words — **confirmed** (from the source), **likely** (several weaker sources agree), **a guess, because…** Never a number you made up. Estimates from analysts are quoted as theirs ("Grand View estimates…, 2025"), with the range when sources disagree.

1. Which market are we in — a decision, not a description

List the 2–3 categories the brand could be filed under (from its own site and brand record, how press and directories file it, what its rivals call themselves — e.g. "AI ad-creative tool" vs "AI coworkers for go-to-market teams"). For each: what buyers call it (search phrasings, review-site categories, subreddit names), who else sits in it, and the evidence that buyers actually use that name. **Recommend one**, with the reason, and say what changes if the brand picks another (different rivals, different buyers, different price norms). If it isn't the market the brand says it's in (its site, brand record, founder's words), say so and name what you couldn't test. The choice is one of three kinds:

| Kind | When | Example | |---|---|---| | **Existing category** | you compete head-to-head and buyers already search for it | "CRM for startups" | | **Sub-category** | you serve a niche of it clearly better | "AI-native sales engagement" | | **New category** | nothing buyers search for describes what you do | "revenue orchestration" |

Rules: if buyers already search for the category, use it or a sub-category of it; if you'd spend half your sales calls explaining the category, don't create a new one; create one only when nothing existing fits, and keep its name plain enough to guess. (After April Dunford's positioning method; writing the full positioning is a separate, backlog job.) Name the neighbours buyers use instead: a spreadsheet, an agency, an in-house hire, the platform's own free tools, doing nothing.

2. How big — top-down and bottom-up

• **Top-down:** two or three analyst estimates for the recommended category, each with publisher, year, figure and what it counts; say why they differ.
• **Bottom-up — the reachable market:** for each buyer group: **how many likely buyers × what they'd pay a year**. The counts come from research-audience's `buyer-groups.md` (it counts buyers or companies per group); you add the price and the value, use your own market figures as context, and say plainly where you dispute a count and why. No buyer groups yet → the groups this run can see, counted the same way and marked provisional. Count buyers in the right unit — companies or people who could buy, from directories, registries, platform counts, job-post counts, industry reports — never community member counts. Price from the category's pricing norms (§5). Every input is sourced or labelled "an assumption, because…". Show the arithmetic in one line per group, and the total. If a bottom-up count isn't possible, say why.
• **Reachable value ≠ what we'll win.** Never multiply a market count by a conversion benchmark (a free-to-paid or trial rate is for people who already signed up, not for a whole market). Give the full reachable value, then a **separate line: the share we could realistically win** in a year, sourced (comparable companies' first-year revenue, the brand's own sign-ups and conversion, its sales capacity) or labelled "an assumption, because…". When the largest input in either line is an assumption, say so next to the total ("the biggest input is a guess — treat this as an order of magnitude"). A brand with no sales, reviews or ads yet gets no year-one revenue figure, only the reachable value and what would size the share.
• **Momentum:** funding into the category in the last 12 months, the number of companies selling it, job postings for the roles that buy it, search interest over time (Google Trends where it opens; relative, with region). Verdict in one line: growing, flat or shrinking — with how sure you are.

3. What's changing — last 12 months, newest first

Open the primary page (the platform's own post, the law's text, the company's release) for every platform or legal claim; if you can't, mark it "not confirmed" — it never goes in the report as fact.

New technology and product shifts, platform changes (ad platforms, app stores, AI assistants, marketplaces), regulation and policy, price moves across the category, new kinds of e