Enterprise Account Research Skill

Premise: Why Enterprise Accounts Are Different

An enterprise is not a company. It's 100+ teams and product lines operating under one logo — each with their own leaders, budgets, priorities, and timelines. They don't coordinate purchases. The VP of ML Platform has no idea what the Applied AI team is evaluating.

Multiple teams within the same enterprise might need your product, but for completely different reasons, on completely different timelines, with completely different budgets. A signal at "Capital One" is meaningless unless you know which team at Capital One it's coming from.

This skill maps the teams inside an enterprise, finds which ones are facing a specific pain-point, and identifies the leaders and people associated with each.

When to Use This Skill

User is asking about a large/enterprise company + a specific pain-point or use case. Two modes:

Net new prospecting:

"Which team at Capital One needs agent evals?"
"Research Goldman Sachs for synthetic data opportunities"
"Find who at Adobe is working on AI guardrails"

Expansion within existing accounts:

"We're already in JP Morgan's trading platform — find other teams that need us"
"Where else inside Bank of America can we expand?"

Both modes use the same workflow. If the user just says "tell me about Acme Corp" without a specific pain angle, this skill may not be the right fit — it's for pain-targeted enterprise research, not general account lookups.

Input

Two things are needed:

The enterprise account — company name or domain
The pain-point / use case — what the seller helps with

If the user provides the company but not the pain-point, ask: "What specific problem or use case are you going after at [company]?"

API Calls

This skill bundles two scripts in the same directory as this SKILL.md file. Never read or reference API credentials directly.

signup.sh — handles authentication. Writes credentials to .env internally. Never exposes the API key.
api.sh — handles all authenticated API calls. Reads credentials from .env internally.

First, resolve the script paths relative to this file's location:

SKILL_DIR="$(dirname "$(find ~/.agents/skills -name SKILL.md -path "*/enterprise-account-research/*" 2>/dev/null | head -1)")"
API="$SKILL_DIR/api.sh"
SIGNUP="$SKILL_DIR/signup.sh"

Then use $SIGNUP for auth and $API for all other calls.

Agent Rules

NEVER fabricate data. If a field is null or missing — say it's missing.
Present what the API returns. No embellishment.
Wait for user input at every decision point. Do not auto-proceed.
Keep messages short. One block of info at a time. Don't front-load explanations — give context only when the user needs to make a decision.
No jargon. Don't use internal OpenFunnel terminology the user wouldn't know.
Always recommend. At every decision point, have an opinion on which option is best for the user and why. Mark it as "(recommended)" with a short reason. Base recommendations on: what data is available, what's missing, and what would get the user closer to identifying the right team and leader.

Workflow

0. Agent Auth Check

Before anything, test if credentials are working by running:

bash "$API" POST /api/v1/signal/get-signal-list '{"pagination": {"limit": 1, "offset": 0}}'

If the call succeeds (returns JSON with signals): skip to Step 1.

If the call fails (returns an error or missing credentials message):

### Welcome to OpenFunnel

OpenFunnel turns daily events in your market into pipeline
— using OpenFunnel's Event Intelligence engine.

To get started, I'll authenticate you via the API.

**What's your work email?**

Wait for user input. Then:

Call bash "$SIGNUP" start "<user_email>"

Tell the user a 6-digit code was sent:

I sent a 6-digit verification code to **{email}**. Reply with the code.

Wait for input. Call bash "$SIGNUP" verify "<user_email>" "<code>"

The response is: {"status": "authenticated", "user_id": "..."}. Credentials are written to .env and .gitignore is updated automatically.

If authentication succeeds → continue to ICP check
If sign-up fails → ask user to retry
If verify fails → tell user the code was invalid or expired (up to 10 attempts in 24 hours), offer to retry or resend

ICP Check

After auth, fetch ICP profiles via bash "$API" GET /api/v1/icp/list.

If ICPs exist: note the available ICPs and continue to Step 1.

If no ICPs exist:

You don't have an ICP profile yet. A quick one will make results much sharper —
it filters by company size, location, and the roles you're targeting.

1. **Quick setup** (recommended) — takes 30 seconds
2. **Skip** — auto-create a broad fallback ICP and continue

If quick setup → collect ICP name, target roles, company size, and location. Create via bash "$API" POST /api/v1/icp/create '<json_body>'.

If skip → auto-create a broad fallback ICP:

{
  "name": "Broad Default ICP",
  "target_roles": ["Any"],
  "employee_ranges": ["1-10", "11-50", "51-200", "201-500", "501-1000", "1001-5000", "5001-10000", "10001+"],
  "location": ["Any"]
}

Call bash "$API" POST /api/v1/icp/create '<json_body>', then tell the user:

I created a default ICP profile: **{name}** (ID: {id})

This keeps things running. For sharper results, set up a proper ICP segment
with your target roles, company size, and location using the `advanced-account-setup` skill.

Continue to Step 1.

1. Resolve the company

User provides a name or domain → bash "$API" POST /api/v1/account/search-by-name-or-domain '{"query": "<name_or_domain>"}'.

Result	Action
Single match	Proceed with the account ID
Multiple matches	Present options — ask user to pick
No matches	Ask for exact domain, offer deep enrichment

2. Company card

bash "$API" POST /api/v2/account/batch '{"account_ids": [<id>]}' → present a short summary:

## {company_name}

{traits.description — 1-2 sentences max}

| | |
|---|---|
| Employees | {employee_count} |
| HQ | {location} |
| Industry | {industry} |
| Signals | {signal_count} detected |

That's it for now. Don't dump everything.

3. Team coverage check

Count how many hiring signals have extracted_team_name populated. This determines the next step.

If teams are found (≥ 1 unique team):

We found {X} teams at {company_name} with signals related to your space:

{list team names}

Would you like to:
1. See the team breakdown — who's on each team, what signals they have
2. Run deep enrichment — find more teams and people (takes 15-30 min, uses credits)
3. Jump to the full research brief

Recommendation logic: If teams exist, recommend seeing the breakdown first. If team count is low (1-2) for a very large enterprise, mention that deep enrichment could uncover more teams.

If no teams found but signals exist:

{company_name} has {X} hiring signals but the data doesn't have team mapping yet.
This means we can see the job posts but can't tell which team they belong to.

Deep enrichment will fix this — it re-processes existing signals to extract team names
and finds new people mapped to specific teams. Takes 15-30 min, uses credits.

Would you like to:
1. Run deep enrichment (recommended) ⚡ *uses credits from your plan*
2. View the signals anyway without team grouping

If no signals at all:

{company_name} doesn't have signal coverage yet.

Deep enrichment will scan for hiring posts, social activity, and team-mapped contacts.
Takes 15-30 min.

Would you like to:
1. Run deep enrichment (recommended) ⚡ *uses credits from your plan*
2. Exit

Wait for user input.

4. Deep enrichment (if chosen)

IMPORTANT: Chat experience rule. Present the entire configuration block below as a single message. Do NOT make API calls (like fetching ICP lists) in the middle of presenting options. All options and explanations must be rendered in one clean block. API calls only happen AFTER the user responds.

Configuration — present as one block:

Deep enrichment works best when it knows what to look for:

1. **Goal** — What does your company do? What pain-point do you solve?
   (e.g., "We help companies build and deploy AI voice agents")
   Default: general enrichment with no product-specific focus

2. **Target roles** — Specific roles to find (e.g., "VP Engineering", "Head of AI")
   Default: all ICP-relevant roles

3. **ICP Profile** — If you have a saved ICP profile name/ID
   Default: your first ICP profile

Set any of these, or "none" for defaults.

Wait for user input. For each one they want to set, collect the value. If the user provides an ICP name instead of an ID, look it up via bash "$API" GET /api/v1/icp/list to resolve the ID.

Then call bash "$API" POST /api/v1/enrich/deep-enrich '<json_body>' with:

domain — from step 1 (already known, do NOT ask for it)
goal — user's input or default
target_icp_roles — user's input or default
icp_id — user's input or default
timeframe — 90
max_jobs_to_check — 200

Monitoring — present after triggering:

Deep enrichment running for {domain}. Typically 15-30 minutes.

1. **I'll monitor and notify you** when it's done (recommended)
2. **Check back later** — just ask me anytime

If user picks monitoring:

Poll in the background:

Re-fetch bash "$API" POST /api/v2/account/batch '{"account_ids": [<id>]}' every 3 minutes
Compare people count to pre-enrichment count
After 2 consecutive polls where count stabilized and differs from initial → done
Timeout after 45 minutes

When done, notify:

Deep enrichment complete for {domain}.
- Before: {initial} signal-mapped people
- After: {final} signal-mapped people

Want to see the updated team view?

If timed out with changes:

Deep enrichment for {domain} is still processing after 45 minutes but data has started coming in.
- Before: {initial} signal-mapped people
- After: {final} signal-mapped people (may still increase)

Want to see what's available so far?

If timed out with no changes:

Deep enrichment for {domain} has been running for 45 minutes with no new data yet.
It may still be processing — check back later.

If user picks check back later:

Got it. Deep enrichment is processing for {domain}. Just ask me to check on {company_name} anytime.

After enrichment (or when user checks back):

Re-fetch bash "$API" POST /api/v2/account/batch '{"account_ids": [<id>]}', go back to step 3 to re-assess team coverage with updated data. Present before/after comparison.

5. Team-first view

This is the core output. Every signal lives under a team. Every person is either confirmed or estimated.

Grouping logic:

Group hiring signals by extracted_team_name — each unique name is a team
Signals with no team name (None, No team extracted) each become their own bucket: "Unknown Team 1", "Unknown Team 2", etc. — we can't assume two unassigned signals are from the same team
Social and engagement signals: attach to a named team if extracted_team_name matches, otherwise their own unknown bucket

People classification:

For each person in a signal's people[] array:

Perfect team match — person_team_name confirms the team (exact or close match to extracted_team_name)
Estimated match — person_team_name is null or doesn't match; they're associated with the signal but not confirmed on the team. Could be on a different team entirely.

Present the team map as a summary first:

### Teams at {company_name}

| Team | Signals | People (perfect team match) | People (estimated match) |
|------|---------|----------------|--------------------|
| Service Engineering | 35 | 1 | 10 |
| Conversational Design | 11 | 0 | 0 |
| Generative AI | 8 | 2 | 0 |
| ... | | | |
| Unknown Team 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Unknown Team 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| ... | | | |
| **People without any team** | — | — | {icp_people_count} |

Which team would you like to drill into?

→ I'd recommend starting with **{team with most matched people or most signals}** —
  they have the strongest data.

6. Team drill-down

For the selected team, present:

Team name + people:

#### {team_name}

**People:**
| Name | Role | Status | LinkedIn | Email |
|------|------|--------|----------|-------|
| Josh Nash | Director, TPM, Chief of Staff | ✓ Perfect team match | {url} | {email} |
| Rajiv Jivan | Director of Engineering | ~ Estimated match | {url} | — |
| ... | | | | |

Signals under this team:

**{job_title}** — posted {date}
> {context}
> Source: {source_url}

**{next signal}** — posted {date}
> ...

For unknown teams, present the same way but with the signal as the identifier:

#### Unknown Team 1

**Signal:** Senior Machine Learning Engineer — posted 2026-03-26
> {context}
> Source: {source_url}

**People:** none

Then ask with a recommendation:

If people data is strong for this team:

Would you like to:
1. See another team
2. Generate the full research brief (recommended)
3. Run deep enrichment for more coverage (uses credits)

If people data is thin (few or no contacts for this team):

Would you like to:
1. Run deep enrichment (recommended — we have signals but not enough people to identify the right leader) ⚡ *uses credits from your plan*
2. See another team
3. Generate the research brief with what we have

7. Research brief

When requested, synthesize per team:

## {company_name} — {pain_point} Research

### {team_name_1}

**People:**
| Name | Role | Status | LinkedIn | Email |
|------|------|--------|----------|-------|
| {name} | {role} | ✓ Perfect team match / ~ Estimated match | {url} | {email} |

**Signals:**
- {signal type}: {one-line summary} — {date} — {source_url}

**Buying window:** {new leader / hiring surge / active evaluation — only if data supports it}

### {team_name_2}
...

### Unknown Teams
{Each unknown team bucket with its signal and any people}

### ICP Contacts (not connected to any signal or team)
{List icp_people separately.
"These contacts match your ICP criteria at {company_name} but aren't connected
to a specific team or signal."}

### Gaps
{What's missing — teams with no people, signals with no team extraction, etc.}

Every claim cites a specific signal. If data is missing, say it's missing.

How the data works

For the agent's understanding — don't explain this to the user unless they ask.

V2 batch response structure:

hiring signals have extracted_team_name — this is the primary team mapping field. Each signal also has people[] with person_team_name (sometimes more specific sub-teams).

socials signals have poster_person (the exec who posted) and sometimes extracted_team_name. Team extraction is weaker on social signals.

linkedin_engagement signals show people at the account engaging with competitor/vendor content.

icp_people are contacts matching ICP role criteria but NOT connected to any signal or team. They exist because enterprises are large — many people match ICP filters but have no signal context. For a 30,000-person company, these lack the specificity needed for targeted outreach. Always present signal-mapped people first. List icp_people separately and note they aren't connected to a specific team.

When team names are missing:

extracted_team_name can be null on older enrichments. Deep enrichment re-processes existing signals to extract teams AND discovers new signals/people with team mapping. Existing icp_people won't be retroactively mapped to teams, but new people from signals will be.

Deep enrichment always helps — even with good team coverage, it can find more teams, more people, and fresher signals.

enterprise-account-research