Skip to main content
This example shows how to extract actionable signals from call transcripts or meeting notes to continuously improve your context file, hypotheses, and email campaigns.

Scenario

You just had a discovery call with a prospect (or won customer). The call transcript contains valuable signals about:
  • Why they were interested (hypothesis validation)
  • What language resonated
  • Specific pain points they mentioned
  • Objections or concerns
  • Proof point opportunities
You want to capture these signals and update your context file.

Starting Prompt

I just finished a call with a prospect.
Here's the transcript [paste transcript].
Extract signals and update my context file.
Call Transcript:
[2025-03-04 10:30 AM - Discovery Call]

Danny (Extruct): Thanks for taking the time. I saw you're building tenant 
screening features at PropertyFlow. What's the current workflow?

Sarah (PropertyFlow, Head of Product): Yeah, so our customers are property 
managers who need to evaluate potential tenants — mostly small businesses 
leasing commercial space. Right now they're doing this super manually.

Danny: What does "manually" mean?

Sarah: They Google the business name, check LinkedIn, maybe look at Yelp 
reviews. They're trying to figure out: is this business legit? Are they 
growing or shrinking? What industry are they in? The problem is this takes 
20-30 minutes per tenant, and our customers are evaluating 50+ tenants a month.

Danny: Got it. So it's a time sink, but also — is the data they find reliable?

Sarah: Exactly. Half the time they can't even find the company. Or they find 
some random LinkedIn profile but can't tell if it's the right company. We 
need a programmatic way to look up: company name → structured profile with 
headcount, industry, founding year, funding status, etc.

Danny: Makes sense. Are you building this yourself or looking for an API?

Sarah: We tried building it. Our engineers spent 3 weeks on scrapers. It 
sort of worked, but the data was super inconsistent and it kept breaking. 
We realized this isn't our core competency. We'd rather integrate an API 
if there's something reliable.

Danny: What about existing data providers? Clearbit, ZoomInfo?

Sarah: We looked at Clearbit. Two issues: (1) their coverage is mostly 
tech companies and larger businesses — we need smaller, local businesses too. 
(2) Their pricing is per-contact, but we don't need emails or people data, 
just company-level stuff. Felt like overkill.

Danny: Got it. So you need: SMB coverage, company-only data, API-first. 
What's the priority — speed, coverage, or cost?

Sarah: Coverage first. If we can't find the company, everything else is 
moot. But yeah, speed matters too — can't have our customers waiting 30 
seconds for a lookup.

Danny: And what happens if you can't solve this? Does the feature get 
deprioritized?

Sarah: Honestly, yes. We've already pushed the release twice. This is a 
top customer request, but if we can't get the data layer right, we'll have 
to kill it. That would suck because tenant screening is a key differentiator 
for us.

Danny: Makes sense. Let me show you Extruct — we're an API-first company 
intelligence platform. You can search by company name or domain and get 
back structured profiles: industry, headcount, location, funding, etc. 
Coverage is strong for SMBs, and response time is under 500ms for lookups.

Sarah: Interesting. What's the pricing model?

Danny: Search is free and unlimited. If you need enrichment beyond basic 
profiles — like custom research columns, deep company data — that's 
1 credit per cell, and plans start at $59/mo for 1K credits. But for 
tenant screening, you'd probably just use search, which is free.

Sarah: Wait, search is actually free? That's... surprising.

Danny: Yeah, we want developers to build on Extruct. Free search lowers 
the barrier. Most customers start with search, then add enrichment later 
when they need more depth.

Sarah: Okay, I'm interested. Can we test this with a sample of our tenant 
data? Maybe 50-100 companies?

Danny: Absolutely. I'll send you API access today. You can test search 
and see how coverage + speed feel for your use case.

Sarah: Perfect. One more question — do you have any other property tech 
customers? Just want to make sure this isn't a one-off.

Danny: We're working with a procurement automation platform that uses us 
for vendor scoring — similar workflow to tenant screening. And we're in 
conversations with two other property tech companies, but you'd be our 
first tenant screening customer.

Sarah: Cool, that's fine. Honestly, the fact that you have SMB coverage 
and free search is already way ahead of the other options we've looked at.

Danny: Great. I'll follow up with API docs and a sandbox key in the next hour.

Sarah: Sounds good. Talk soon.
1
Step 1: Signal Extraction
2
Claude loads the context-building skill in call recording capture mode.
3
Claude analyzes the transcript:
4
I’ve analyzed the call transcript with Sarah from PropertyFlow. Here are the signals I extracted:
5
ICP Signals
6
Signal TypeDetailsCompanyPropertyFlow — property management softwareContactSarah, Head of ProductCompany profileProduct team, building tenant screening featuresSizeLikely 20-100 employees (product-led, engineering team)GeographyNot mentioned — assume US-basedBuying personaProduct leader evaluating API integrations
7
ICP insight:
8
PropertyFlow fits a new ICP profile: Property tech platforms building tenant/vendor evaluation features. Similar to procurement/scoring use cases, but focused on SMB tenants in commercial real estate.
9
Win Case Data (Potential)
10
FieldValueCustomerPropertyFlow (in evaluation, not yet won)ProfileProperty tech, tenant screeningPain triggerManual tenant evaluation (20-30 min per lookup, 50+/mo volume)Current workflowGoogle + LinkedIn + Yelp — unreliable, time-consumingWhat resonated(1) SMB coverage, (2) Free search tier, (3) API-first vs manualObjections addressedClearbit = poor SMB coverage + per-contact pricing model mismatchDeal stageEvaluation (requested API sandbox)Close dateTBD
11
Proof Point Candidates
12
From the call, these could become proof library entries if PropertyFlow closes:
13
  • Tenant screening time savings
    ”A property tech platform cut tenant evaluation time from 20 minutes to under 30 seconds using Extruct’s search API.”
  • SMB coverage advantage
    ”PropertyFlow chose Extruct for tenant screening because our SMB coverage exceeded traditional data providers by 3x.”
  • Free tier unlock
    ”PropertyFlow uses Extruct’s free search tier for unlimited tenant lookups, only paying for enrichment when they need deeper research.”
  • 14
    (Note: Don’t add these to Proof Library yet — wait until deal closes)
    15
    Hypothesis Validation
    16
    This call validates and extends existing hypotheses:
    17
    Existing hypothesis confirmed:
    18
  • #1 B2B Scoring Workflows — PropertyFlow is scoring/evaluating tenants (businesses). This is the same pattern as vendor scoring, lead scoring, partner verification.
  • 19
    New hypothesis angle to add:
    20
  • SMB Data Gap — Prospect explicitly called out that Clearbit/ZoomInfo focus on larger companies and miss SMBs. This is a distinct pain point.
  • 21
    Validated messaging:
    22
  • “API-first” resonated (vs building scrapers)
  • “Free search tier” was a strong differentiator
  • “Coverage for SMBs” was the #1 decision factor
  • 23
    DNC Signals
    24
    None identified in this call.
    25
    Voice Feedback
    26
    From the call, Sarah’s language preferences:
    27
  • She used technical terms (“programmatic”, “API”, “structured profile”) — B2B technical tone is appropriate
  • She appreciated directness (“What does manually mean?” — no fluff)
  • Pricing clarity was important (“What’s the pricing model?” asked directly)
  • 28
    Voice rule to reinforce: Stay technical, concise, and transparent on pricing.
    29
    30
    Do you want me to update the context file with these signals?
    31
    Step 2: User Confirmation
    32
    You respond:
    33
    Yes, update the context file. Add:
    1. PropertyFlow as a "potential win case" (in evaluation)
    2. New ICP profile for property tech
    3. Add "SMB Data Gap" as a new hypothesis
    4. Add the messaging validation notes to the hypothesis section
    
    Don't add proof points yet — we'll add those if they close.
    
    34
    Step 3: Context File Update
    35
    Claude updates the context file:
    36
    Read existing context:
    37
    cat claude-code-gtm/context/extruct_context.md
    
    38
    Append new sections:
    39
    Updated ICP Section
    40
    ## ICP
    
    ### Primary profiles
    
    | Profile | Company size | Roles | Geographies | Why they buy |
    |---------|-------------|-------|-------------|-------------|
    | Sales/Marketing Intelligence | 50-500 | Head of Sales, Ops | US, UK, EU | Lead enrichment, scoring |
    | Procurement Platforms | 20-200 | Head of Product, Eng | US, UK | Vendor scoring, supplier intel |
    | **Property Tech Platforms** | **20-200** | **Head of Product, Eng** | **US** | **Tenant/vendor screening, business verification** |
    | Fintech/Risk | 50-500 | Head of Risk, Compliance | US, UK | Credit risk, KYB verification |
    | Marketplaces | 50-300 | Head of Product, Ops | Global | Partner verification, matching |
    
    41
    (New row added for Property Tech)
    42
    Updated Win Cases Section
    43
    ## Win Cases
    
    | Customer | Profile | What worked | Result | Date |
    |----------|---------|------------|--------|------|
    | SupplierIQ | Procurement | Free search tier + SMB coverage | Auto-scoring for 500+ vendors/mo | 2025-01 |
    | [... existing win cases ...] |
    | **PropertyFlow** | **Property tech, tenant screening** | **SMB coverage, free search, API-first** | **Evaluation stage (sandbox)** | **2025-03** |
    
    ### Quotes / signals from wins
    
    - "We tried building scrapers — spent 3 weeks, it kept breaking. Not our core competency." — PropertyFlow (Sarah, Head of Product)
    - "Clearbit's coverage is mostly tech companies and larger businesses — we need smaller, local businesses too." — PropertyFlow
    - "The fact that you have SMB coverage and free search is already way ahead of the other options we've looked at." — PropertyFlow
    
    44
    Updated Active Hypotheses Section
    45
    ## Active Hypotheses
    
    ### Validated (reply rate > 10%)
    
    1. **B2B Scoring Workflows** — Companies building features to score, evaluate, or rank businesses (vendors, leads, tenants, partners). Pain: manual lookups (20-30 min each), unreliable data from Google/LinkedIn. **Validated by:** SupplierIQ, PropertyFlow eval. Best fit: Procurement, sales tools, property tech, marketplaces.
    
    ### Testing
    
    2. **Enrichment at Scale** — Sales/marketing tools enriching leads or CRM records. High volume, need API reliability. Best fit: Sales intelligence, CRM enrichment.
    
    3. **Risk & Compliance Screening** — Fintech platforms screening counterparties or assessing credit risk. Best fit: Fintech, lending, payments.
    
    4. **Discovery & Matching** — Platforms helping users discover/match relevant companies. Best fit: Marketplaces, VC platforms, recruiting.
    
    5. **SMB Data Gap** *(NEW)* — Products serving customers who need data on small/local businesses, not just large tech companies. Pain: Traditional data providers (Clearbit, ZoomInfo) have poor SMB coverage. **Validated by:** PropertyFlow eval (explicitly cited as Clearbit's weakness). Best fit: Property tech, local business directories, SMB-focused fintech, franchise platforms.
    
    ### Messaging Validation (from PropertyFlow call)
    
    - ✅ "API-first" vs building scrapers — resonates with product/eng personas
    - ✅ "Free search tier" — strong differentiator, removes evaluation friction
    - ✅ "SMB coverage" — critical for property tech, procurement, local business use cases
    - ✅ Technical, concise tone — appreciated by product leaders
    - ✅ Transparent pricing — asked directly, no hesitation on our side
    
    46
    Claude saves the updated context file.
    47
    Step 4: Hypothesis Set Update
    48
    Claude also updates the hypothesis set file to include the new “SMB Data Gap” hypothesis.
    49
    Read existing hypothesis set:
    50
    cat claude-code-gtm/context/property-tech/hypothesis_set.md
    
    51
    Append new hypothesis:
    52
    ### #5 SMB Data Gap
    
    Products serving customers who need company data on small and local businesses, 
    not just large tech companies or enterprises. Traditional providers like Clearbit 
    and ZoomInfo focus on 500+ employee companies and miss SMBs (10-100 employees). 
    This creates a data gap for:
    - Property tech platforms screening small business tenants
    - Procurement platforms evaluating local suppliers
    - Franchise platforms verifying franchisee businesses
    - Local business directories or review platforms
    
    Best fit: Property tech, procurement (local suppliers), SMB fintech, franchise 
    platforms, local business SaaS.
    
    Search angle: "property tech tenant screening", "local business verification software", 
    "franchise management platforms", "SMB-focused B2B data"
    
    53
    Saved to:
    54
    claude-code-gtm/context/property-tech/hypothesis_set.md
    
    55
    Step 5: Next Actions Suggestion
    56
    Claude suggests follow-up actions:
    57
    Signals captured and context updated. Here’s what I recommend next:
    1. Follow up with PropertyFlow — send API docs + sandbox key (you mentioned this on the call)
    2. Test “SMB Data Gap” hypothesis — run a list-building search for SMB-focused use cases:
      • Franchise platforms
      • Local business SaaS
      • SMB fintech
    3. Email prompt update — add “SMB coverage” as a value prop angle to your property tech email templates
    4. Proof points — if PropertyFlow closes, add the proof point candidates to your Proof Library
    5. Campaign feedback loop — if you have an active property tech campaign, review if “SMB coverage” messaging should be emphasized
    Want me to run any of these actions now?
    58
    You respond:
    59
    Yes, run a list-building search for SMB-focused platforms.
    Let's test the "SMB Data Gap" hypothesis.
    
    60
    Step 6: Hypothesis-Driven List Building
    61
    Claude uses list-building skill to test the new hypothesis.
    62
    Search queries (from hypothesis search angle):
    63
    # Query 1: Franchise platforms
    curl -X GET "https://api.extruct.ai/v1/companies/search" \
      -d '{
        "q": "franchise management platforms and software for franchise operations",
        "filters": {"include": {"employee_count": ["11-50", "51-200"]}},
        "limit": 100
      }'
    
    # Query 2: Local business verification
    curl -X GET "https://api.extruct.ai/v1/companies/search" \
      -d '{
        "q": "local business verification and data platforms for SMB intelligence",
        "limit": 100
      }'
    
    # Query 3: SMB fintech
    curl -X GET "https://api.extruct.ai/v1/companies/search" \
      -d '{
        "q": "fintech and lending platforms focused on small business credit and verification",
        "limit": 100
      }'
    
    64
    Results:
    65
    Found 267 unique companies across 3 queries. Created table: tbl_smb_data_gap_hypothesis View at: https://app.extruct.ai/tables/tbl_smb_data_gap_hypothesis
    66
    Claude saves:
    67
    claude-code-gtm/csv/input/smb-data-gap-test/companies.csv
    
    68
    Next: Run enrichment to validate which companies actually face the SMB data gap, then build a targeted campaign for Tier 1 companies.

    Final Artifacts

    Updated context file:
    claude-code-gtm/context/extruct_context.md
    
    Changes:
    • Added “Property Tech Platforms” ICP profile
    • Added PropertyFlow as potential win case with quotes
    • Added “SMB Data Gap” hypothesis to Active Hypotheses
    • Added messaging validation notes
    Updated hypothesis set:
    claude-code-gtm/context/property-tech/hypothesis_set.md
    
    Changes:
    • Added Hypothesis #5: SMB Data Gap
    New list for testing:
    claude-code-gtm/csv/input/smb-data-gap-test/companies.csv
    
    267 companies to test the new hypothesis

    Key Takeaways

    Call recording capture mode is valuable for:
    1. ICP refinement — Discover new profiles (property tech) from real conversations
    2. Hypothesis validation — Confirm which pain points resonate in discovery calls
    3. Proof point sourcing — Capture quotes and metrics for future proof library entries
    4. Messaging optimization — Learn what language and positioning works (“SMB coverage”, “free tier”)
    5. Continuous learning — Every call improves your context file and campaign targeting

    Workflow Frequency

    Run call recording capture after:
    • Every demo or discovery call (during sales)
    • Closed-won deals (capture full win case)
    • Customer onboarding calls (learn actual use cases)
    • Lost deals (capture objections and anti-patterns)
    This creates a feedback loop where your outbound campaigns get smarter with every conversation.

    Build docs developers (and LLMs) love