# How to Give an Assistant a Prospect Research Brief Give an assistant a prospect research brief that produces dated evidence, relevant questions, and clearly labeled hypotheses. By Righthand Team · 2026-10-06 Source: https://www.righthand.ai/blog/how-to-give-an-assistant-a-prospect-research-brief Prospect research should produce a reason for a conversation, not a large collection of facts about a person. A clear research brief tells the assistant which business question you are trying to answer and what evidence would help. That keeps the result relevant and makes unsupported assumptions easier to spot. ## Quick answer Specify the target company, the sales question, approved source types, relevant facts, and the output you want. Ask for dated links and a clear separation between evidence and hypotheses. Keep contact discovery and outbound messaging as separately authorized tasks. Righthand's [sales development role](/roles/sales-dev-rep) includes prospect research. Use the sources and connected accounts available for your task; do not assume access to private company data or every external database. ## Start with the commercial question “Research this company” produces a broad report. “Find public evidence that this company coordinates work across multiple client-facing teams” gives the assistant a more useful direction. Choose a few relevant categories: business model, customer type, current public initiatives, likely workflow, and the role of the person you may speak with. Avoid personal trivia that does not help assess fit. Define what would disqualify the prospect or make the result inconclusive. If your offer serves small agencies, a large unrelated manufacturer may not be a fit regardless of how many facts the assistant finds. ## Set the evidence standard Ask for the company's official website, public announcements, job pages, or other approved sources first. Link claims to the pages that support them and record when the information was checked. If a page is undated, say so rather than presenting it as a recent announcement. Separate direct evidence from hypotheses. A careers page advertising an operations role may suggest coordination work, but it does not prove the company has a particular problem or is shopping for your service. Make unknowns useful. “Could not verify current team size” is better than a guessed number that later shapes a message. The assistant can suggest a question to ask in the conversation instead. ## An illustrative research result A founder wants to speak with a small creative agency about client handoffs. The assistant reviews the agency's public services and case studies. It finds that the agency offers brand strategy and production, with projects involving external specialists. The report states those public facts and suggests a hypothesis: coordinating approvals across specialists may be relevant. It does not claim the agency misses deadlines or has inefficient operations. The suggested opener is a question about how approvals move between the client and production team. It is grounded in the agency's work without pretending the assistant knows an internal pain point. ## A prospect-research brief > Research Cedar Studio for a possible client-coordination conversation. Use official public company pages and announcements. Identify services, customer types, recent dated initiatives, and evidence of collaboration across roles. Link every important claim. Separate verified facts, uncertain information, and hypotheses to test. Suggest three relevant questions. Do not guess revenue, team size, technology use, or operational problems. Do not find personal contact details or send outreach. Deliver a one-page brief with source links. Add a research cutoff if you need the report before a call. Otherwise, a sprawling search can consume more time than the result is worth. ## Review for accuracy and relevance Check the company identity and whether the sources belong to the intended organization. Similar names and stale pages can produce a convincing report about the wrong business. Then assess whether the facts help your sales question. A polished company overview can still fail if it offers no useful conversation angle. Remove irrelevant details and retain the evidence needed to explain the hypothesis. Avoid turning research into a certainty score without a defined rule. If you classify fit, state the criteria and mark missing information. The owner should be able to disagree with the classification by inspecting the same sources. ## FAQ ### Should the assistant personalize with hobbies or personal posts? Use professional information relevant to the business conversation. Personal details can feel intrusive and often do little to establish commercial fit. ### Can research prove a prospect needs our product? Public evidence can suggest a relevant workflow. It rarely proves an internal problem, budget, or buying intent. Use the conversation to validate those questions. ### What if the sources disagree? Show the conflict, dates, and source types. Do not combine inconsistent figures into an invented definitive answer. ## Related resources Explore [task delegation](/features/task-delegation) for the research brief and [lead qualification](/use-cases/lead-qualification) for the next assessment.