Agents In Use
What’s new todayLast update
1005 additions

Claude Code researches prospects from local criteria

A non-coder reports a Claude Code prospecting stack using local targeting criteria, company and contact APIs, researched openers and job-change alerts.

OUR ADAPTATION

Suggested prompt

Suggested prompt written by Agents In Use, not the source author. Replace bracketed inputs and review tool permissions first.

Using [local targeting criteria], retrieve matching companies and personas through [authorised data API]. Verify contacts, draft openers from specific public evidence and flag noisy signals. Show endpoint costs and keep send decisions reviewable.

What happened

A non-coder reports a Claude Code prospecting stack using local targeting criteria, company and contact APIs, researched openers and job-change alerts.

Reported by u/Unspoken_Table on Reddit

How the agent did it

  1. Save explicit company and persona criteria in a local file.
  2. Query Crustdata for matching companies, people and activity.
  3. Verify contact information through FullEnrich.

Where a person stepped in

The author sets targeting criteria and continues tuning personalisation and alerts. The post does not establish an approval gate before each outbound send.

A non-coder describes replacing a cumbersome prospecting setup with Claude Code and three services. A local text file defines the ideal customer profile: industry, headcount, funding stage and target personas. Claude reads that context before querying Crustdata for companies, matching people, hiring signals and recent social activity.

FullEnrich checks contact information through multiple providers, while Instantly supplies the delivery layer. Claude uses a contact's recent posts to draft an opener tied to a specific observation. Webhooks alert the operator to job changes or relevant hiring activity, prompting additional outreach preparation. The author reports constructing the system over a weekend and using it in place of the previous tool combination.

The practical failure was expensive API selection: the author initially used a real-time endpoint when cached data would usually suffice, consuming more credits. Personalisation still needed work, and some alerts triggered on irrelevant job postings. The post does not specify a human approval gate before every send, so readers should not infer one from the presence of drafted text. No reply-rate or revenue benchmark is supplied. The copyable detail is to make targeting criteria persistent and explicit, then separate structured retrieval, verified enrichment and evidence-based writing rather than relying on a free-form company search alone.

Prompt
Suggested prompt (written by Agents In Use, not the author's)

Source: Reddit · u/Unspoken_Table on Reddit

Frequently asked questions

Why keep a local criteria file?

It supplies consistent filters for company and people searches; the author says the agent lacks targeting context without it.

What costly mistake occurred?

The author used a more expensive real-time endpoint when cached search data would have been sufficient for most requests.

What remained unreliable?

Personalisation still needed iteration, and webhook alerts sometimes fired on irrelevant job postings. No measured conversion outcome is supplied.

More details

Remaining steps

  1. Draft specific openers from recent public posts.
  2. Review API costs, personalisation quality and noisy webhook alerts.

About this account

Claude Code reads targeting context, chains data and enrichment APIs, analyses public posts and prepares outreach when new signals arrive.

Firsthand account by u/Unspoken_Table on Reddit; original publication date verified against Reddit created_utc 1778827582 = 2026-05-15T06:46:22Z. Outcomes are the author’s reports, not independently reproduced. Suggested prompt written by Agents In Use; not the author’s original prompt.

Credit: u/Unspoken_Table on Reddit

Source published 15 May 2026

Source checked 14 Oct 2026

Tools and topics

Claude Code · Crustdata · FullEnrich · Instantly · Webhooks

Prospect targeting · API cost controls · Signal-driven drafting

Editorial completeness: 100/100. Measures documented fields, not agent performance or verified outcomes.