case-study-builder
Turn client wins into formatted case studies for proposals, social proof, and sales conversations. Use when someone needs to document results, build credibility, or create reusable proof assets.
Best use case
case-study-builder is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Turn client wins into formatted case studies for proposals, social proof, and sales conversations. Use when someone needs to document results, build credibility, or create reusable proof assets.
Teams using case-study-builder should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/case-study-builder/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How case-study-builder Compares
| Feature / Agent | case-study-builder | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Turn client wins into formatted case studies for proposals, social proof, and sales conversations. Use when someone needs to document results, build credibility, or create reusable proof assets.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Case Study Builder Everyone wants social proof. Nobody makes time to create it. You finish a project, the client's happy, you move on — and six months later you're in a sales call with nothing to show. This skill fixes that. Give me the raw details. I'll produce three formats you can use immediately. --- ## Mode Detect from context or ask: *"Quick writeup, full case study, or full asset package?"* | Mode | What you get | Best for | |------|-------------|----------| | `quick` | 1 format: paragraph summary for proposals | Fast social proof, proposal inserts | | `standard` | 3 formats: proposal blurb, social proof pull-quote, sales story | Active pitching, LinkedIn, website | | `deep` | 3 formats + blog-ready case study + FAQ variant + campaign assets | Content marketing, SEO, sales enablement | **Default: `standard`** — use `quick` if they say "just need something fast." Use `deep` if they want to turn the win into a marketing asset. --- ## Context Loading Gates **Before generating anything, collect all 8 fields:** | Field | What to Collect | |---|---| | 1. Client | Industry, company size/stage, named or anonymized? | | 2. Before | What was broken or painful? Any numbers? | | 3. Actions | What did you specifically do? Scope, timeline, role | | 4. After | **REQUIRED: at least one specific number** | | 5. Timeline | How long to achieve the result? | | 6. Quote | Direct client quote if available | | 7. Naming | Can we name the client, or must we anonymize? | | 8. Use case | Where will this be used? (proposals / website / LinkedIn) | **Outcome Extraction Protocol — enforced on Field 4:** If the user says "results were good" or "things improved," stop and ask: > "I need at least one number to make this credible. Pick one: > - Revenue change (e.g., 'closed 3 new clients worth $15K') > - Time saved (e.g., 'cut from 10 hours to 2 hours/week') > - Lead volume (e.g., 'went from 0 to 5 inbound leads/month') > - Rough estimate is fine — it doesn't have to be exact." **Do not draft until Field 4 has at least one number.** --- ## Phase 1: Situation Analysis Before drafting, reason through: 1. **Result strength:** Is the outcome a Tier 1 (hard metric), Tier 2 (soft metric), or Tier 3 (proxy)? This determines how confident the language should be. 2. **Hero check:** Is the story told from the client's perspective, or yours? Client = hero, you = guide. 3. **Tension check:** What made this hard? Without a challenge, there's no story — just a list. 4. **Format match:** Which use case did they specify? That determines which format to optimize. **Tier system for results language:** | Tier | Type | Example | Language | |---|---|---|---| | 1 | Hard metric | "Revenue +40%" | State directly | | 2 | Soft metric | "Team finally aligned" | "For the first time in years..." | | 3 | Proxy metric | "Enabled Series A close" | "Contributed to..." | | 4 | Directional | "Noticeable improvement" | "Significant improvement in..." | --- ## Phase 2: The Hero Principle **The client is the hero. You are the guide.** Before writing, flip the framing: ❌ Wrong: "I built a content system that generated leads." ✅ Right: "Sarah went from scrambling to fill her pipeline to getting 3 inbound inquiries per week — all from a content system we built in 6 weeks." Every format should be written from what the CLIENT experienced, not what YOU delivered. --- ## Phase 3: Generate Three Formats ### Format 1: Two-Liner (Proposals & Bios) **Formula:** `[What was done] + [scale/scope] + [for who] + [result or timeframe]` ``` [Strong action verb] [what was delivered] for [specific client descriptor]. [Outcome metric] in [timeframe]. ``` **Example:** > Built a full content system for a Series B SaaS founder with no marketing team. > 0 to 3 inbound leads/week in 6 weeks. --- ### Format 2: Story Version (LinkedIn & Sales Calls) **Structure — 4 paragraphs, 150–250 words:** ``` **Set the scene:** [Their situation when you arrived — 2-3 sentences with stakes] **Show the complexity:** [What made this hard — 2-3 sentences] **What happened:** [Specific actions taken — no feature lists, just moves] **What changed:** [Outcome — the number + the transformation] ``` --- ### Format 3: Full Case Study (Website & Portfolio) ```markdown # Case Study: [Client Name or Descriptor] ## The Challenge [2-3 paragraphs: situation, stakes, what wasn't working] ## The Approach [Phases or steps — what happened and in what order] ## The Results [Metrics, before/after comparison, named outcomes] ## Key Details - Client: [Named or "A [descriptor] company"] - Industry: [Sector] - Timeline: [Duration] - Scope: [What was delivered] ## What Made This Different [Unique angle, unexpected obstacle, or pivotal insight] ## Client Quote > "[Testimonial — or placeholder if not yet collected]" > — [Name], [Title] ``` --- ## Phase 4: Self-Critique Pass (REQUIRED) After generating all three formats, evaluate: **Two-liner:** - [ ] Does it have a specific number? (Not "improved results" — a real metric) - [ ] Is it 2 sentences or fewer? - [ ] Would someone scanning a proposal stop and read it? **Story version:** - [ ] Is the client the hero (not the author)? - [ ] Is there genuine tension — something that made this hard? - [ ] Does the closing paragraph include the key metric? **Full case study:** - [ ] Does the Results section lead with numbers? - [ ] Is the Challenge section specific enough that a similar prospect recognizes their situation? - [ ] Is the client quote (or placeholder) present? **Flag any failure:** "The story version has no tension — add one obstacle or unexpected challenge before the 'What happened' paragraph." --- ## Phase 5: Distribution Plan | Format | Best locations | When to use | |---|---|---| | Two-liner | Proposals, email bios, LinkedIn About section | Any sales context | | Story | LinkedIn post, podcast intros, sales call opener | Weekly content | | Full case study | Website portfolio page, PDF download, RFP response | Late-stage buyer research | --- ## Output Structure ```markdown ## Case Study: [Client Descriptor] — [Date] ### Situation Summary [2-sentence analysis from Phase 1] Result tier: [1/2/3/4] --- ### Format 1: Two-Liner [Final copy] ### Format 2: Story Version [Final copy] ### Format 3: Full Case Study [Full markdown] --- ### Self-Critique Notes - Two-liner: [pass/issue] - Story: [pass/issue] - Full: [pass/issue] ### Distribution Plan [Where to use each] ### Next Step [If no quote collected → run testimonial-collector] [If strong story → suggest LinkedIn post from story format] ``` --- **Cross-reference:** If a client quote was captured here, run `testimonial-collector` to properly format and score it for your testimonial library. --- *Skill by Brian Wagner | AI Marketing Architect | brianrwagner.com*
Related Skills
linkedin-authority-builder
Build a LinkedIn content system for thought leadership. Use when someone needs to establish authority, attract inbound leads, or build a consistent content presence. Covers positioning, content pillars, formats, and posting rhythm.
daily-briefing-builder
Generate a clean morning brief in Claude Code — pulls today's priorities, unposted content, and weather from your vault.
youtube-summarizer
Automatically fetch YouTube video transcripts, generate structured summaries, and send full transcripts to messaging platforms. Detects YouTube URLs and provides metadata, key insights, and downloadable transcripts.
voice-extractor
Extract and document someone's authentic writing voice from samples. Use when someone needs a "voice guide," wants to capture their writing DNA, or needs to train AI to write in their style. Also useful for ghostwriting, brand voice documentation, or onboarding writers.
vault-cleanup-auditor
Audit your Obsidian vault in Claude Code — finds stale drafts, empty folders, duplicate filenames, and incomplete files. Saves a dated report.
tweet-draft-reviewer
Review tweet drafts in Claude Code against 8 voice rules. Scores 1-10, breaks down every rule, and rewrites anything that scores below 7.
testimonial-collector
Systematically gather, score, and format client testimonials. Use when someone needs social proof, wants to collect feedback, needs to turn happy clients into public advocates, or asks for help requesting or drafting a testimonial.
social-card-gen
Generate platform-specific social post variants (Twitter/X, LinkedIn, Reddit) from one source input. Works with or without Node.js script. Includes platform reasoning, quality review, and guardrails against cross-posting spam.
reddit-insights
Search and analyze Reddit content using semantic AI search via reddit-insights.com MCP server. Use when you need to: (1) Find user pain points and frustrations for product ideas, (2) Discover niche markets or underserved needs, (3) Research what people really think about products/topics, (4) Find content inspiration from real discussions, (5) Analyze sentiment and trends on Reddit, (6) Validate business ideas with real user feedback. Triggers: reddit search, find pain points, market research, user feedback, what do people think about, reddit trends, niche discovery, product validation.
newsletter-creation-curation
Industry-adaptive B2B newsletter creation with stage, role, and geography-aware workflows
meeting-prep-cc
Generate a pre-meeting prep brief in Claude Code. Researches participants, pulls vault context, builds agenda, surfaces sharp questions. Use when user says "prep for this meeting," "I have a call with," "meeting tomorrow with," or "prep brief for [name/company]."
marketing-principles
Apply timeless marketing and business principles to any problem. Use when someone needs strategic thinking, wants to evaluate a marketing decision, needs a framework for a tough choice, or mentions "first principles," "should I do X," "what would work here," or wants to think through a marketing problem systematically.