/battle-card-builder

Battle Card Builder — Worked Example

All companies, products, URLs, and figures are fictional. This example completes the chain: the competitive-intel-watch example (run dated 2026-07-28) flagged the battle card's Pricing & Packaging and Do Not Say sections as stale after Wrenchline launched an entry tier. This card is the rebuild, using the snapshot and watch report already in session as its evidence base — the skill searched only for gaps and freshness, exactly as its Application step 1 instructs.

Invocation: Build a battle card: Fieldlight vs Wrenchline, shops of 10-50 techs, owner or office manager buying — triggered by the watch report flagging their new Essentials tier. Snapshot and watch report in session.

Battle Card: Fieldlight vs Wrenchline

As-of date: 2026-07-30 Deal context: trades shops of 10-50 techs; buyer is the owner or office manager

1. Thirty-Second Read

• They win when: the shop already runs Wrenchline payroll or inventory — switching costs decide it — Fact (multi-year contracts, module lock-in per pricing page, Jul 2026)
• We win when: tech adoption is the pain — their largest review complaint cluster is "my techs won't use it" — Inference (40+ reviews since Jan; review mining summary, Jul 2026)
• The one thing to say: "Ask your techs to demo both apps for a day — we'll win that vote."

2. Say This

• "Our tech app is the reason shops pick us — their own reviews say techs resist the Wrenchline app" — Inference (review cluster above; say "their reviews say," never more) — reviews, Jul 2026
• "Essentials doesn't include the dispatch board — at 25+ techs you're forced into the full suite and its contract" — Fact (Essentials tier page, Jul 24, 2026)
• "You can start on Fieldlight this week — no implementation project, no annual contract" — Fact (our pricing, Jul 2026)

3. Ask This (trap questions)

• "What happens to your Essentials price when you cross 25 techs?" — documented answer: forced upgrade to the full suite, annual contract required — Fact (tier page fine print, Jul 24, 2026)
• "Ask them how long a typical implementation runs" — documented answer: their own onboarding guide describes a 6-to-10-week implementation — Fact (onboarding guide, checked Jul 2026)

4. Watch Out For

• Their depth pitch is real. Payroll, inventory, and fleet in one system — do not get drawn into a module-count comparison; we lose it — Fact (product pages, Jul 2026)
• Likely counter: "Fieldlight is just scheduling — you'll outgrow it" — Inference (their "operating system" positioning implies it). Response is the roadmap conversation, not a feature claim we can't yet evidence.

5. Pricing & Packaging Snapshot

• Essentials: $79/month under 25 techs (scheduling, quoting, invoicing; no dispatch board) — Fact (pricing page, as of Jul 24, 2026)
• Full suite: per-tech pricing published to 100 techs; above that, "contact sales" hides the number — Fact (same page)
• New since last card: Essentials launched Jul 2026 — treat any pre-July pricing talk track as dead

6. Do Not Say

• Don't say "we're the affordable option" — Essentials at $79 contests it head-on; a rep leading with price now walks into their new tier — (watch report, Jul 28)
• Don't say "Wrenchline can't do quoting for small shops" — Essentials includes quoting — Fact (tier page, Jul 24, 2026)
• Don't claim their techs "hate" the app — the evidence is a review complaint cluster, an Inference; "their own reviews say techs resist it" is the defensible version

Appendix: Evidence Table

Assumptions to Validate

• Essentials excludes the dispatch board permanently, not just at launch (carried from the watch report)
• Our win rate actually improves in deals where a tech-app demo happens (instrument this)
• The 6-10 week implementation figure holds for Essentials, not just the full suite

Why this example works

• The chain fed the card. The competitor snapshots supplied the strengths and weaknesses; the watch report supplied the freshest layer (the Essentials tier) and named which sections to rebuild. The skill searched only for gaps — the onboarding guide was the one new fetch.
• "Do Not Say" is doing its real job. The team's most beloved claim — "we're the affordable option" — died on July 24, and the card says so explicitly. That's the section protecting reps from their own folklore, four days after the folklore went stale.
• Both trap questions cite documented answers. Each one's answer sits in the evidence table. The card contains no question a rep would be asking on hope.
• Labels calibrate how hard a rep can lean. The tier facts are load-bearing (Fact, dated); the tech-adoption weakness is used, but phrased as "their reviews say" because it's an Inference — the card teaches the rep the defensible phrasing, not just the claim.