Review platforms skill
B2B review site strategy — G2, Capterra, TrustRadius, Gartner Peer Insights, and Product Hunt.
by LeadMagic·MIT license·★ 62 Stars on the repo·GitHub ↗
Use now
npx degit LeadMagic/gtm-skills/skills/growth/review-platforms#main ~/.claude/skills/review-platformsChecked ·commit main
Inside this skill
SKILL.md · the author's own words# Review Platforms ## Overview Review sites are **distribution nodes** in B2B buyer research — not vanity badges. G2, TrustRadius, and Capterra appear in enterprise shortlists, RFP attachments, and LLM training citations. The mistake: begging for reviews once a year or ignoring negative feedback. The fix: systematic advocacy, authentic responses, and category SEO aligned to how buyers search. ## When to Use - "How do we get more G2 reviews?" - "Respond to negative G2 review" - "G2 vs TrustRadius strategy" - "Review generation campaign"
Word-for-word excerpt, not a result. Read the full SKILL.md ↓
Files of Review platforms
SKILL.md
Show the full text173 lines
Review Platforms
Overview
Review sites are distribution nodes in B2B buyer research — not vanity badges. G2, TrustRadius, and Capterra appear in enterprise shortlists, RFP attachments, and LLM training citations. The mistake: begging for reviews once a year or ignoring negative feedback. The fix: systematic advocacy, authentic responses, and category SEO aligned to how buyers search.
When to Use
- "How do we get more G2 reviews?"
- "Respond to negative G2 review"
- "G2 vs TrustRadius strategy"
- "Review generation campaign"
- "Improve G2 grid ranking"
- "Competitive reviews on G2"
Cross-ref customer-marketing for broader advocacy; this skill is platform-specific.
Authoritative Foundations
- G2. Grid rankings combine satisfaction and market presence. Review recency and volume matter — stale profiles decay.
- TrustRadius. Long-form verified reviews; strong for enterprise technical buyers.
- Gartner Peer Insights. Enterprise peer reviews tied to Magic Quadrant research.
- Gainsight Advocacy Maturity. Systematic ask at milestone moments (go-live, ROI, renewal).
Step-by-Step Process
Phase 1: Platform Priority
| Platform | Best for | Buyer type |
|---|---|---|
| G2 | Broad SMB/mid-market SaaS | Marketing + ops researchers |
| Capterra | Paid search adjacency | SMB comparison shoppers |
| TrustRadius | Depth, enterprise | Technical evaluators |
| Gartner Peer Insights | Enterprise RFP | Procurement + IT |
| Product Hunt | Launch spike | Early adopters |
Pick primary (G2 for most B2B SaaS) + secondary based on ICP.
Phase 2: Profile Optimization
- Category placement accurate (wrong category = wrong buyers)
- Screenshots, videos, pricing page link updated quarterly
- Comparison pages vs top 3 competitors
- Integrations and supported languages complete
- Vendor responses enabled with owner assigned
Load references/g2-playbook.md, references/trustradius-playbook.md.
Phase 3: Review Generation (Ethical)
When to ask (trigger moments):
| Moment | Why |
|---|---|
| 30 days post go-live | Implementation win fresh |
| NPS 9–10 response | Promoter identified |
| Support ticket resolved (CSAT 5) | Gratitude peak |
| Renewal signed | Long-term validation |
| ROI milestone | Executive willing to advocate |
How to ask:
- CSM sends personal email with direct review link (not generic homepage)
- One-click path; 5-minute time estimate stated
- Never incentivize cash/gifts for reviews (violates platform ToS)
- Swag or donation to charity per review — check current G2/TrustRadius policy
Volume target: Steady 2–4 new reviews/month beats annual bursts.
Phase 4: Responding to Reviews
Load templates/review-response-playbook.md.
| Review type | Response pattern |
|---|---|
| Positive | Thank by name; reinforce specific outcome; invite CS contact |
| Mixed | Acknowledge gap; state fix or roadmap (no over-promise); take offline |
| Negative | Respond <48h; empathize; factual correction if wrong; exec escalation path |
| Fake / competitor | Flag to platform; factual vendor response; document internally |
Never: Argue, disclose confidential terms, or identify private data.
Phase 5: Competitive Intelligence
- Monitor competitor review velocity monthly
- Tag themes: implementation, support, pricing, integrations
- Feed
positioning-messagingandbattlecard-builder - Win/loss interviews vs review themes
Phase 6: Convert Review Traffic
- G2 intent data (paid) → routed to SDR/AE in CRM (
crm-toolkit) - Review page CTAs → demo with UTM
- Badge on site: "Leader" only if current — expired badges harm trust
Output Format
- Review platform strategy (primary + secondary)
- Generation campaign (triggers, email templates, owners)
- Response playbook for recent reviews
- Profile optimization checklist
- Competitive review summary
Quality Check
- Primary platform matches ICP (G2 vs TrustRadius)
- Ask triggers tied to customer milestones (not random blast)
- No incentivized reviews violating ToS
- Negative response plan <48h with offline path
- CRM routing for G2 intent (if licensed)
- Profile updated within 90 days
Common Pitfalls
- Annual review drive. Grid rewards recency. Fix: monthly cadence.
- Founder-only responses. Looks small. Fix: CS + product owner signatures.
- Arguing in public. Escalates. Fix: empathize + offline.
- Wrong G2 category. Attracts bad-fit reviewers. Fix: recategorize.
- Ignoring TrustRadius for enterprise. G2 alone misses technical depth.
Execution Artifacts
references/framework-notes.md— Framework index and authority routingtemplates/output-template.mdscripts/check-output.pyreferences/g2-playbook.mdreferences/trustradius-playbook.mdreferences/review-platform-comparison.mdtemplates/review-response-playbook.mdtemplates/review-ask-email.md
Related Skills
customer-marketing— advocacy programs, case studiescompetitive-intel— competitor review monitoringinbound-triage— route review-sourced leadscrm-toolkit— intent data fields
| 1 | |
| 2 | name review-platforms |
| 3 | description >- |
| 4 | B2B review site strategy — G2, Capterra, TrustRadius, Gartner Peer Insights, |
| 5 | and Product Hunt. How to collect reviews, respond to negative feedback, rank |
| 6 | in categories, and convert review traffic to pipeline. Use when building G2 |
| 7 | presence, responding to reviews, review generation campaigns, or competitive |
| 8 | review intel. Triggers on: "G2 reviews", "TrustRadius", "Capterra", "review |
| 9 | site strategy", "respond to negative review", "get more G2 reviews", "G2 badge", |
| 10 | "review generation". |
| 11 | license MIT |
| 12 | compatibility Claude Code, Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, OpenCode, Goose, Hermes, Windsurf, Zed |
| 13 | metadata |
| 14 | version "1.1.0" |
| 15 | author LeadMagic |
| 16 | category growth |
| 17 | tags [reviews, g2, capterra, trustradius, advocacy, reputation] |
| 18 | related_skills |
| 19 | - customer-marketing |
| 20 | - competitive-intel |
| 21 | - positioning-messaging |
| 22 | - inbound-triage |
| 23 | - cs-playbooks |
| 24 | frameworks |
| 25 | - "G2 — Review Generation and Grid Methodology" |
| 26 | - "TrustRadius — TruVoice and buyer research model" |
| 27 | - "Gainsight — Customer Advocacy Maturity Model" |
| 28 | - "Influitive — Advocate marketing programs" |
| 29 | |
| 30 | |
| 31 | # Review Platforms |
| 32 | |
| 33 | ## Overview |
| 34 | |
| 35 | Review sites are **distribution nodes** in B2B buyer research — not vanity badges. |
| 36 | G2, TrustRadius, and Capterra appear in enterprise shortlists, RFP attachments, |
| 37 | and LLM training citations. The mistake: begging for reviews once a year or |
| 38 | ignoring negative feedback. The fix: systematic advocacy, authentic responses, |
| 39 | and category SEO aligned to how buyers search. |
| 40 | |
| 41 | ## When to Use |
| 42 | |
| 43 | "How do we get more G2 reviews?" |
| 44 | "Respond to negative G2 review" |
| 45 | "G2 vs TrustRadius strategy" |
| 46 | "Review generation campaign" |
| 47 | "Improve G2 grid ranking" |
| 48 | "Competitive reviews on G2" |
| 49 | |
| 50 | Cross-ref `customer-marketing` for broader advocacy; this skill is **platform-specific**. |
| 51 | |
| 52 | ## Authoritative Foundations |
| 53 | |
| 54 | **G2.** Grid rankings combine satisfaction and market presence. Review **recency** |
| 55 | and **volume** matter — stale profiles decay. |
| 56 | **TrustRadius.** Long-form verified reviews; strong for enterprise technical buyers. |
| 57 | **Gartner Peer Insights.** Enterprise peer reviews tied to Magic Quadrant research. |
| 58 | **Gainsight Advocacy Maturity.** Systematic ask at milestone moments (go-live, ROI, renewal). |
| 59 | |
| 60 | ## Step-by-Step Process |
| 61 | |
| 62 | ### Phase 1: Platform Priority |
| 63 | |
| 64 | | Platform | Best for | Buyer type | |
| 65 | |---|---|---| |
| 66 | | **G2** | Broad SMB/mid-market SaaS | Marketing + ops researchers | |
| 67 | | **Capterra** | Paid search adjacency | SMB comparison shoppers | |
| 68 | | **TrustRadius** | Depth, enterprise | Technical evaluators | |
| 69 | | **Gartner Peer Insights** | Enterprise RFP | Procurement + IT | |
| 70 | | **Product Hunt** | Launch spike | Early adopters | |
| 71 | |
| 72 | Pick **primary** (G2 for most B2B SaaS) + **secondary** based on ICP. |
| 73 | |
| 74 | ### Phase 2: Profile Optimization |
| 75 | |
| 76 | Category placement accurate (wrong category = wrong buyers) |
| 77 | Screenshots, videos, pricing page link updated quarterly |
| 78 | Comparison pages vs top 3 competitors |
| 79 | Integrations and supported languages complete |
| 80 | Vendor responses enabled with owner assigned |
| 81 | |
| 82 | Load `references/g2-playbook.md`, `references/trustradius-playbook.md`. |
| 83 | |
| 84 | ### Phase 3: Review Generation (Ethical) |
| 85 | |
| 86 | **When to ask (trigger moments):** |
| 87 | |
| 88 | | Moment | Why | |
| 89 | |---|---| |
| 90 | | 30 days post go-live | Implementation win fresh | |
| 91 | | NPS 9–10 response | Promoter identified | |
| 92 | | Support ticket resolved (CSAT 5) | Gratitude peak | |
| 93 | | Renewal signed | Long-term validation | |
| 94 | | ROI milestone | Executive willing to advocate | |
| 95 | |
| 96 | **How to ask:** |
| 97 | |
| 98 | CSM sends personal email with **direct review link** (not generic homepage) |
| 99 | One-click path; 5-minute time estimate stated |
| 100 | Never incentivize cash/gifts for reviews (violates platform ToS) |
| 101 | Swag or donation **to charity per review** — check current G2/TrustRadius policy |
| 102 | |
| 103 | **Volume target:** Steady 2–4 **new** reviews/month beats annual bursts. |
| 104 | |
| 105 | ### Phase 4: Responding to Reviews |
| 106 | |
| 107 | Load `templates/review-response-playbook.md`. |
| 108 | |
| 109 | | Review type | Response pattern | |
| 110 | |---|---| |
| 111 | | **Positive** | Thank by name; reinforce specific outcome; invite CS contact | |
| 112 | | **Mixed** | Acknowledge gap; state fix or roadmap (no over-promise); take offline | |
| 113 | | **Negative** | Respond <48h; empathize; factual correction if wrong; exec escalation path | |
| 114 | | **Fake / competitor** | Flag to platform; factual vendor response; document internally | |
| 115 | |
| 116 | **Never:** Argue, disclose confidential terms, or identify private data. |
| 117 | |
| 118 | ### Phase 5: Competitive Intelligence |
| 119 | |
| 120 | Monitor competitor review velocity monthly |
| 121 | Tag themes: implementation, support, pricing, integrations |
| 122 | Feed `positioning-messaging` and `battlecard-builder` |
| 123 | Win/loss interviews vs review themes |
| 124 | |
| 125 | ### Phase 6: Convert Review Traffic |
| 126 | |
| 127 | G2 intent data (paid) → routed to SDR/AE in CRM (`crm-toolkit`) |
| 128 | Review page CTAs → demo with UTM |
| 129 | Badge on site: "Leader" only if current — expired badges harm trust |
| 130 | |
| 131 | ## Output Format |
| 132 | |
| 133 | Review platform strategy (primary + secondary) |
| 134 | Generation campaign (triggers, email templates, owners) |
| 135 | Response playbook for recent reviews |
| 136 | Profile optimization checklist |
| 137 | Competitive review summary |
| 138 | |
| 139 | ## Quality Check |
| 140 | |
| 141 | [ ] Primary platform matches ICP (G2 vs TrustRadius) |
| 142 | [ ] Ask triggers tied to customer milestones (not random blast) |
| 143 | [ ] No incentivized reviews violating ToS |
| 144 | [ ] Negative response plan <48h with offline path |
| 145 | [ ] CRM routing for G2 intent (if licensed) |
| 146 | [ ] Profile updated within 90 days |
| 147 | |
| 148 | ## Common Pitfalls |
| 149 | |
| 150 | **Annual review drive.** Grid rewards recency. Fix: monthly cadence. |
| 151 | **Founder-only responses.** Looks small. Fix: CS + product owner signatures. |
| 152 | **Arguing in public.** Escalates. Fix: empathize + offline. |
| 153 | **Wrong G2 category.** Attracts bad-fit reviewers. Fix: recategorize. |
| 154 | **Ignoring TrustRadius for enterprise.** G2 alone misses technical depth. |
| 155 | |
| 156 | ## Execution Artifacts |
| 157 | |
| 158 | `references/framework-notes.md` — Framework index and authority routing |
| 159 | `templates/output-template.md` |
| 160 | `scripts/check-output.py` |
| 161 | `references/g2-playbook.md` |
| 162 | `references/trustradius-playbook.md` |
| 163 | `references/review-platform-comparison.md` |
| 164 | `templates/review-response-playbook.md` |
| 165 | `templates/review-ask-email.md` |
| 166 | |
| 167 | ## Related Skills |
| 168 | |
| 169 | `customer-marketing` — advocacy programs, case studies |
| 170 | `competitive-intel` — competitor review monitoring |
| 171 | `inbound-triage` — route review-sourced leads |
| 172 | `crm-toolkit` — intent data fields |
| 173 |
Discussion
Alternatives
⚙️ Phase 2 Playbook — Foundation & Scaffolding> Duration: 3-5 days | Agents: 6 | Gate Keepers: DevOps Automator + Evidence Collector🌐 NEXUS — Network of EXperts, Unified in Strategy> NEXUS transforms The Agency's independent AI specialists into a synchronized intelligence network. This is not a prompt collection — it…Ansoff matrixGenerate an Ansoff Matrix analysis mapping growth strategies across market penetration, market development, product development, and diversification. Use when considering growth options, planning market expansion, or evaluating strategic growth paths.ImproveSurvey any codebase as a senior advisor and produce prioritized, self-contained implementation plans for OTHER models/agents to execute. Strictly read-only on source code — never implements, fixes, or refactors anything itself. Use when asked to audit a codebase, find improvement opportunities (bugs, security, performance, test coverage, tech debt, migrations, DX), suggest features or where to take the project next (roadmap, product direction), or generate handoff plans for another agent to implement.
Browse more free Claude skills or everything in Product.