Account & Prospect Research

Prospect Technology Research Agent

ai

Interactively researches a selected prospect's technology stack across EHR, CRM, AI, HR, and BPM systems, then compiles a structured technology profile report to inform targeted outreach and discovery.

Solutions EngineerAccount ExecutiveSales Development Rep
15 min
To a tech profile vs. 2+ hours of manual research
5
System categories profiled (EHR, CRM, AI, HR, BPM)
Cited
Findings sourced to public web evidence
Use Case 1

Pre-Call Tech Profiling

Trigger: Seller selects a prospect to research before outreach or a call

1.Confirm the target prospect with the user
2.Run deep web research across EHR, CRM, AI, HR, and BPM
3.Capture each finding with its source and confidence
4.Identify likely pain points given the stack
5.Generate tailored discovery questions
6.Assemble a structured technology profile report
7.Mark unverified items as unconfirmed

Sellers walk into discovery with a sourced view of the prospect's stack and openers tied to it.

Use Case 2

Conflicting-Source Resolution

Trigger: Public sources disagree on a prospect's technology

1.Surface both sources rather than choosing silently
2.Rank by recency and source quality
3.Infer likely transitions (e.g., migrations)
4.Present the conflict as a discovery hook
5.Avoid asserting unverified detail

Ambiguous intelligence becomes a useful talking point instead of a guess.

Integrations

Web Research & News
Knowledge Base
Document Storage (Google Drive)
CRM (Salesforce, HubSpot)
Report & Chart Generation

Industries

all

See It In Action

A sample conversation with this agent

Research the tech stack at Meadowbrook Health before my discovery call.
On it. I'll confirm the prospect with you, then run deep web research across five categories—EHR, CRM, AI/automation, HR systems, and BPM. For each I capture what they run, the source, and how confident the evidence is. I assemble a structured technology profile: current stack, likely pain points given that stack, and discovery questions tailored to it. Anything I can't verify I mark as 'unconfirmed,' not asserted.
You found two conflicting sources on their EHR—which do you report?
I report both and rank by recency and source quality. A 2026 press release naming Epic outweighs a 2023 job posting referencing Cerner—likely a migration. I present it as 'Epic (current, per 2026 announcement); previously Cerner (2023 postings)' rather than picking one silently. The migration itself is a useful discovery hook, so I flag it as a talking point instead of hiding the conflict.
Turn the research into something I can actually open the call with.
Profile summary: Epic EHR (recent migration), Salesforce CRM, early-stage AI pilots in revenue cycle, Workday HR. Likely pain: post-migration workflow gaps and manual intake. Three discovery openers: how the Epic cutover changed intake turnaround, where the AI pilots are stalling, and whether revenue-cycle staffing kept pace. Each maps to a capability without pitching—openers, not claims.