competitor-research
Skill70 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub
Researches one B2B SaaS competitor across 13 dimensions (company, product, ICP, pricing, reviews, content, launches, search and AI visibility, tech stack, hiring, go-to-market, social, paid ads) and writes a sourced dossier with an executive summary, a threat level, strengths and weaknesses, and a data gaps section. Run it once per competitor, then compare. Triggers: "competitor analysis", "competitor research on", "what is [competitor] doing", "compare us to", "competitive landscape", "battlecard prep". Run after /company-context and /icp-research. Not for researching your own company (use /company-context).
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 18 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 22
Before positioning, so you know what buyers compare you to.
- Distinctive: line 23
When a competitor shows up in deals more often, or launches something.
- Very specific: line 25
Don't use it for your own company (/company-context) or a single factual question ("what does X charge?"), which you can answer directly.
- Very specific: line 33
Paths: Write to context/competitors/MMYY-<competitor-slug>.md.
- Distinctive: line 62
If you have 2 or more dossiers,: write a landscape file: threat table, feature comparison, where each competitor is weak, and 3 to 5 …
- Distinctive: line 71
All 13 dimensions present, each either filled or marked with why it's empty.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 18 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
Competitor research
Build a dossier on one competitor that a marketer, a seller and a founder can each act on. The rule that governs everything: no data point without a source. Every claim carries a URL and an access date, or it's marked [Not available].
When to use it
- Building the context folder, after you know who your customer is.
- Before positioning, so you know what buyers compare you to.
- When a competitor shows up in deals more often, or launches something.
Don't use it for your own company (/company-context) or a single factual question ("what does X charge?"), which you can answer directly.
Inputs
Required: the competitor's name and website. If the name is ambiguous, confirm before you start.
Recommended: context/company/ and context/icp/ (so you can judge the threat against your own buyer), any existing dossier to refresh, and the questions the user cares about most (pricing, outbound, a feature).
Paths. Write to context/competitors/MMYY-<competitor-slug>.md. With two or more dossiers done, add context/competitors/MMYY-landscape.md. Agency or consultant? Swap context/ for clients/<client>/context/ throughout.
Tools. Web search and page fetching cover most of it. Exa helps find similar companies and clean page text; Firecrawl helps with pricing and comparison pages. Paid SEO and tech-stack tools are optional: if you don't have one, say so in that dimension rather than guessing. On a large site, list the pages first and only read the ones that matter (product, pricing, positioning, customers).
The 13 dimensions
- Company: founding, funding, headcount, leadership.
- Product: core offer, key features, what changed recently.
- ICP: who they sell to, judged from their case studies and logos.
- Pricing: model, tiers, entry price, what's gated behind sales.
- Reviews: themes in G2, Capterra or Trustpilot praise and complaints, with counts.
- Content: what they publish, how often, which topics.
- Launches: what they've shipped in the last 12 months.
- Search and AI visibility: the topics they rank or get cited for.
- Tech stack: tools visible on the site, if you can see them.
- Hiring: open roles by team, which signal where they're investing.
- Go-to-market: self-serve, sales-led or both; channels; partnerships.
- LinkedIn and social: founder and company activity, recurring themes.
- Paid advertising: ads visible in public ad libraries, angles they test.
Steps
- Confirm scope. Name, URL, and what the user wants to learn. Produces: a one-line brief.
- Research each dimension in the order above. Note the source and date for each finding. If a dimension needs a tool you don't have, write
[Not available: needs X]and move on. - Tag confidence.
[VERIFIED],[INFERRED],[ESTIMATED],[UNAVAILABLE]. Aim for at least half verified. - Assess strengths and weaknesses against your ICP, not in the abstract.
- Set a threat level: primary (same buyer, same problem, often in deals), enterprise tier (same problem, bigger buyer), direct ICP (same buyer, adjacent problem), watch (early or stealth), low, or defunct. Explain the call in two sentences.
- Write the executive summary last, in 2 to 3 short paragraphs.
- List data gaps with the action that would fill each one.
- If you have 2 or more dossiers, write a landscape file: threat table, feature comparison, where each competitor is weak, and 3 to 5 recommendations. Cite the dossiers rather than repeating them.
- Hand off to
/positioning, which uses the competitor set as its list of alternatives.
Output shape
Title the file # Competitor research: [Name]. Then: a recent-changes line (on a refresh), executive summary, threat level, a section per dimension with inline (Source: X) notes, strengths and weaknesses, data gaps, and a sources table at the end with URL, access date and confidence per dimension.
What good looks like
- All 13 dimensions present, each either filled or marked with why it's empty.
- Major claims (funding, size, pricing) have more than one source.
- Review themes come with counts, not adjectives.
- The threat level would make sense to your sales team.
- A refresh updates the existing file and notes what changed, rather than creating a duplicate.
Mistakes to avoid
- Copying their marketing claims as fact. Note the claim, then the evidence.
- Guessing pricing that's behind "contact sales".
- Reporting old news as current. Date every finding.
- A weakness list that's really a wish list ("their UX is bad") with no evidence.
- Restating every dossier inside the landscape file.
Chain
Part of the free five-skill chain: /icp-research → competitor-research → /tov-guidelines → /positioning → /messaging. The other six context skills (company context, win-loss, founder POV, brand kit, funnel and goals) are in the paid context plugin ($19.99, link in the README).
Other versions26 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- matteotitta/repo-structure-in-house★ 70100% same
Edited · 1
- matteotitta/claude-marketing-context★ 097% same
Wrote their own version · 24
- explorium-ai/gtm-skills★ 209same name
- hamzafarooq/claude-code-starter★ 145same name
- marcosmodly/marketing-skill★ 100same name
- matteotitta/genesys-skills★ 46same name
- smithjohn78390/smith--skills★ 41same name
- yangliu2060/smith--skills★ 40same name
- Synter-Media-AI/mcp-server★ 21same name
- CodeAlive-AI/ceo-ai-os★ 9same name
- spiralcrew-ou/profilespider-agent-skills★ 9same name
- YepAPI/skills★ 8same name
14 more not listed
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.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use company-context.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
nocodeworkSkillcompany-context
Interview the user to build or update a reusable company context file for AI tools — what the company does, its offer, clients, personas, positioning, voice, and the questions clients ask most. Use when the user says "build our company context", "create company context", "set up business context for AI", "update our company context", or wants AI to answer clients and write content in the company's voice without re-explaining the business each time. Produces company-context.md.
Also in 3 projects that use this
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- context/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- outputs/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- icp-researchSkill
- levelSkill
- messagingSkill
- positioningSkill
- tov-guidelinesSkill
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.

