meeting-prep

What this skill does

# Meeting Prep

Produce a tight, decision-ready brief for a ~30-minute meeting. Lead with a TL;DR (top 3 to know plus an opener), then back it with company, relationship, attendee, and conversation context.

## Input

The user will provide via `$ARGUMENTS` an account identifier (required), attendees (recommended), plus optional context:

- **Account identifier (required)** — one of:
  - **Preferred**: a ZoomInfo account/company ID (numeric). Use directly as `companyId`; skip the search step.
  - **Fallback**: a company name, domain, or ticker. Resolve to a `companyId` via `search_companies` as a first step (see Workflow step 3).
- **Attendees (recommended)** — names and/or email addresses. Without attendees, the brief is necessarily generic.
- **Meeting context (strongly recommended)** — a free-form description of the meeting and what success looks like. Richer is better — flat enums like "discovery / QBR / renewal / demo" produce flat briefs. Capture as much as is true: the meeting purpose, the stakes, what's been discussed before, the deal stage, what you want to walk out with, known tensions or open questions, competitive context, the offering in play, and any working hypotheses you want to test or pitfalls to avoid. Examples:
  - *"30-min discovery with the CISO and Director of SecOps. They downloaded the report on identity sprawl last month. Goal: get to a technical evaluation. Worried they're already late-stage with Acme — need to test that fast without burning credibility."*
  - *"Renewal QBR. $600K ARR up in 60 days. Champion left two months ago, new VP Eng hasn't engaged. Need to surface value delivered, find the new owner, and avoid a price-only negotiation."*
  - *"Demo for the Director of Data Platform. Came inbound on the streaming use case. They have an in-house ETL setup. Goal: land a paid pilot. Don't lead with the AI features — they'll see it as a distraction."*

If the identifier is ambiguous (e.g., a bare string that could be a name or a ticker), prefer the most specific interpretation: all-digits → ID; short all-caps token (≤5 chars) → ticker; a string containing a dot or known TLD → domain; otherwise → name.

## Workflow

Parallelize aggressively — most calls only need the `companyId` and can fan out together. Per-attendee, run `contact_research` and `enrich_contacts` in parallel: `contact_research` returns narrative context but quality varies, so `enrich_contacts` guarantees a structured fallback (title, email, phone, employment history) when narrative data is redacted or thin.

1. **Anchor on purpose.** Read the meeting context from `$ARGUMENTS`.
   - If supplied, restate it in 1-2 sentences as the *meeting purpose* and keep it as the framing lens for every downstream step.
   - If missing, ask the user once. If they decline or say "just general prep", default to **general meeting prep** and state that assumption at the top of the brief.
   - From the context, derive: a **meeting purpose** (1 line), the **desired outcome** (what walking out successful looks like), **priority topics/themes** (3-5 — e.g., identity sprawl, ETL pain, renewal value), and any **named risks or hypotheses to test** (e.g., "test if they're already late-stage with Acme"). These priorities drive the `account_research` query, attendee framing, talking-point ranking, and the suggested agenda.

2. **Get GTM context** — Call `get_gtm_context` (no params, no credits). Use it to tailor talking points to your offerings and strategic priorities, flag competitor presence, and frame around your ICP. If empty, proceed without.

3. **Resolve the company.**
   - If the user supplied a ZoomInfo account/company ID, use it directly as `companyId` — do not call `search_companies`.
   - Otherwise, call `search_companies` with the appropriate field (`companyWebsite` for a domain, `companyTicker` for a ticker, `companyName` for a name) and extract `companyId` from the top match. If no confident match, surface the ambiguity to the user before continuing rather than guessing.

4. **Fan out company research in parallel (retrieval, not filtering).** Treat each tool call as a context-retrieval step. Pull broadly now; decide what's relevant during synthesis. Steps that only need the `companyId` can run together — `account_research`, `enrich_companies`, `enrich_news` (last 30 days), `enrich_scoops` (last 30 days), and `enrich_intent`.
   - **Tailor the `account_research` query to the meeting purpose.** Don't pass a generic "tell me about this account" string. Inject the full meeting context — purpose, desired outcome, priority topics, named hypotheses, attendees if known — and ask for relationship history, deal context, engagement signals, competitive presence, and anything that would change how you walk into the meeting.
   - **Intent retrieval**: call `enrich_intent` with the `companyId` only — do **not** pre-filter by topic. The goal is to see what topics this company is actually expressing intent on, not to confirm hypotheses. Filtering happens in step 6.

5. **Resolve and research attendees in parallel** — Run `search_contacts` for all attendees in one batch (by email, name + companyId, or title + companyId). Then run `contact_research` and `enrich_contacts` in parallel for the resolved set (batch up to 10 per `enrich_contacts` call). If an attendee can't be resolved, note it — don't fabricate.

6. **Synthesize the brief.** Each retrieval is raw context — now decide what makes the brief, framed by the meeting purpose and priority topics. Apply these principles:
   - **Intent triage**: review every topic returned by `enrich_intent`. Keep topics that map to the meeting purpose, priority topics, your GTM offerings, or a non-obvious signal worth flagging (e.g., a competitor's category, an adjacent buying motion). Drop topics that are noise. If nothing meaningful remains, skip the intent section.
   - **News/scoops triage**: keep items that connect to the meeting purpose, the deal stage, attendees, or priority topics. Drop generic press releases unrelated to the agenda.
   - **Classify relationship posture per attendee** from `employmentHistory` and `contact_research` cues: **Cold**, **Warm-but-dormant** (significant past engagement at a prior employer or directly, but no current activity — highest leverage), **Active**, or **Hostile**. The opener depends on this.
   - **Talking-point ranking**: cap at 3-5, ranked by relevance to the desired outcome. Each must tie to a specific surfaced fact and (where possible) a named attendee.
   - **Hypothesis check**: explicitly address each named hypothesis or risk from step 1 — did the data confirm, contradict, or fail to resolve it? Surface in the TL;DR.
   - **Source tagging**: tag key claims with sources (`[CRM]`, `[contact_research]`, `[enrichment]`, `[news]`, `[scoops]`, `[intent]`). When `contact_research` is redacted/minimal, mark the attendee profile with a confidence note.
   - **Past-date flag**: for any date in `account_research` that is in the past relative to today, retain and flag for verification rather than dropping silently — could be active negotiation, a stale CRM sync, or a missed milestone.

7. **Write the TL;DR last,** after the rest is drafted. Frame it explicitly by the meeting purpose and desired outcome.

## Output Format

### TL;DR

> **Meeting purpose / desired outcome**: [restate the user's context in one line, or "general meeting prep (no context supplied)" if defaulted].
>
> **Top 3 to know walking in** (each tied to the desired outcome):
> 1. [Most decision-relevant fact]
> 2. [Second]
> 3. [Third]
>
> **Hypothesis check** (one line per named hypothesis from the input): confirmed / contradicted / unresolved.
>
> **Open with**: "[Single recommended opening line — verbatim, calibrated to attendee posture]"

### Company Snapshot

| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Industry | |
| Employees | |
| Revenue | |
| HQ | |
| Business Model | |
| Website | |

One-paragraph overview from the enrichment description.