competitive-brief
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Produces a structured competitive brief. Use when comparing competitors, analyzing rival products, or preparing a competitive landscape summary. Do not use for general multi-source research synthesis without a competitor focus (use synthesize-research).
7 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- nisarth/claude-skills-storetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- AndyMelnykov/pm-loopstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- erickdronski/gtm-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 16, 2026
- anthropics/knowledge-work-pluginstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- shahbazaliofficial/Claude-Skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- vantionlabs/saas-startertheir own version, first seen Oct 9, 2026
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 7
- anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins★ 35ksame name
- vantionlabs/saas-starter★ 9same name
- AndyMelnykov/pm-loops★ 1same name
- nisarth/claude-skills-store★ 1same name
- erickdronski/gtm-skills★ 0same name
- KevinReactiv8/claude-skills★ 0same name
- shahbazaliofficial/Claude-Skills★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository40 other files it gives its agents.
- address-pr-feedbackSkill
- architectureSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- code-structureSkill
- contract-guardSkill
- debugSkill
- deep-workSkill
- dependency-upgradeSkill
- deploy-checklistSkill
- diagnoseSkill
- documentationSkill
- explain-pr-step-by-stepSkill
- feedback-checkpointSkill
- grill-meSkill
- grill-with-docsSkill
- handoffSkill
- improve-codebase-architectureSkill
- incident-responseSkill
- memory-managementSkill
- observabilitySkill
- plan-criticSkill
- plan-from-rfcSkill
- pr-babysitterSkill
- prototypeSkill
- queue-checkSkill
- rebase-onto-mainSkill
- releaseSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- setup-engineering-skillsSkill
- squash-and-pushSkill
- synthesize-researchSkill
- system-designSkill
- tddSkill
- tech-debtSkill
- testing-strategySkill
- to-issuesSkill
- to-prdSkill
- triageSkill
- verification-before-completionSkill
- zoom-outSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 7 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 26
Do not scrape or use data in ways that violate site terms or privacy law.
- Distinctive: line 27
Keep the brief decision-oriented — not an encyclopedia dump.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 7 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Competitive Brief
Compare competitors on evidence, not vibes. Separate facts from inference.
Workflow
- Frame — decision the brief must support; target segment; must-compare dimensions.
- Select set — 3–7 competitors or substitutes; note why each is in/out.
- Gather evidence — primary sources (product, pricing, docs, changelogs); date every claim. See
references/brief-template.md. - Compare — table on agreed dimensions; call out unknowns explicitly.
- Implications — what to copy, avoid, or differentiate; confidence level per recommendation.
- Sources — links/citations for material claims.
Constraints
- Label speculation as speculation.
- Do not scrape or use data in ways that violate site terms or privacy law; prefer public official sources.
- Keep the brief decision-oriented — not an encyclopedia dump.
Verification
- Decision frame stated
- Comparison table with dated sources
- Unknowns listed
- Implications tied to evidence
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.