Thanks so much, Daniel J.. Super helpful!
On LinkedIn, my best-performing message for the connection request is "Hi XXX, I've been thinking a lot about runtime intelligence for AI agents. Would love to connect." And once the connection is made, I go with "Hi XXX, I would love to get your POV on the value of runtime intelligence for agents and what I'm building to provide it. Might you have 15 mins this week?"
Disqualifications are split 50/50 between: (1) the lead not being the decision-maker (most of the times their boss is, sometimes they aren't on the team that is building agents) and (2) the company not feeling the pain we solve for. For the latter category, that's split evenly between (a) the company is very mature in their agentic development, and has been building internal visibility and control measures for quite some time; (b) the company is very early in building agents, so the problem is not yet ripe; and (c) the company is in our sweet-spot, but is using a traditional tracing tool and they don't believe our runtime intelligence platform is incrementally valuable enough to pursue further.
The traction we've have so far is with a few companies that sit in between (b) and (c), where they have been building agents for several months, the intelligence gap is growing, and they don't have a solution yet. But that TAM is too small, and it needs to expand. But that seems more of a product challenge than a messaging issue.
