domains / families / marketing / customer-research
When the user wants to conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research. Use when the user mentions "customer research," "ICP research," "talk to customers," "analyze transcripts," "customer interviews," "survey analysis," "support ticket analysis," "voice of customer," "VOC," "build personas," "customer personas," "jobs to be done," "JTBD," "what do customers say," "what are customers struggling with," "Reddit mining," "G2 reviews," "review mining," "digital watering holes," "community research," "forum research," "competitor reviews," "customer sentiment," "PMF survey," "product/market fit survey," "customer interview questions," "interview outreach," "Sales Safari," or "find out why customers churn/convert/buy." Use for analyzing existing research assets, mining online sources, AND running primary research (interviews and surveys). For writing copy informed by research, see copywriting. For acting on research to improve pages, see cro. When the user wants to conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research.
The two copies overlap heavily on Mode 1 (analyzing existing assets), the extraction framework, synthesis steps, and confidence guardrails, but they disagree on the overall structure and contain material steps the other lacks. The coreyhaines31 copy defines three modes (including a distinct primary-research mode with a reference to interviews-and-surveys.md) and adds a prompt-injection warning for fetched content. The sickn33 copy defines only two modes, but adds a detailed 'Digital Watering Hole' section with ICP-based source selection and a reference to source-guides.md, plus explicit recency, sample-bias, and minimum-sample guardrails that the first copy does not show. Crowning one would hide a real alternative workflow.