agentleFS
Sign inStart free
prosyo-aiprosyo-ai/gtm-skill/skills/comparison-page-writer/SKILL.md

comparison-page-writer

Skill13 starsChanged 23 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use this skill when you need a comparison or alternatives page that ranks and converts: \"write an X vs Y page\", \"competitor alternatives page\", \"best alternatives to X\", \"comparison landing page\". Builds an honest, buyer-first comparison: quick verdict, who each option is best for, a criteria table, pricing compared with dates, migration notes, FAQs and schema, written to win the click from buyers already shopping and to stay fair enough that readers and answer engines trust it.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈7

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this for "<competitor> vs <you>", "<competitor> alternatives" and "best <category> for <use case>" pages.

    line 16
  2. Distinctive:

    When the competitor is the better choice (yes, really).

    line 44
  3. Distinctive:

    Every factual claim about the competitor is current and checkable.

    line 55
  4. Distinctive:

    MUST date pricing and feature facts about competitors.

    line 61
  5. Distinctive:

    MUST include a "when they are the better choice" section.

    line 62
  6. Distinctive:

    NEVER misstate a competitor's features, prices or limits.

    line 63
  7. Distinctive:

    NEVER use a competitor's logo or trademarks in ways that imply endorsement.

    line 64

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Use this for "<competitor> vs <you>", "<competitor> alternatives" and "best <category> for <use case>" pages. Readers on these pages are close to buying; honesty converts them better than spin.

Inputs

  • Competitor research (current pricing with the date checked, features, positioning, reviews).
  • Your product facts, pricing and limits.
  • Proof: customers who switched, migration stories, review quotes you may use.

The play

1. Pick the page type

QueryPagePromise
"x vs y"Head-to-headHelp me choose between these two
"x alternatives"List of options, you includedHelp me find something better than x
"best <category> for <use case>"Ranked listHelp me shortlist

2. Lead with the verdict

A short answer at the top: who should choose the competitor, who should choose you. Readers and answer engines both pull from it.

3. Build the criteria table

Criteria the buyer cares about (not just your strengths): price and pricing model, setup time, key capabilities, limits, integrations, support, best for. Mark facts with a "last checked" date.

4. Write the sections

  1. Quick verdict.
  2. At-a-glance table.
  3. Key differences, each with what it means for the buyer.
  4. Pricing compared, with a worked example for a typical team.
  5. When the competitor is the better choice (yes, really).
  6. Switching: effort, what moves over, help offered.
  7. FAQ (5-8 questions).
  8. CTA that fits: try free, see a migration plan, book a comparison demo.

5. Add SEO and schema

Title under 60 characters ("X vs Y: honest comparison for <audience>"), meta under 155, FAQPage schema, internal links to the other comparison pages and the product pages.

What good looks like

  • A reader who should choose the competitor would agree with the page.
  • Every factual claim about the competitor is current and checkable.
  • The pricing example uses a realistic team, not a cherry-picked one.
  • The common mistake is a page where you win every row, which readers distrust and reviewers call out.

Rules

  • MUST date pricing and feature facts about competitors.
  • MUST include a "when they are the better choice" section.
  • NEVER misstate a competitor's features, prices or limits.
  • NEVER use a competitor's logo or trademarks in ways that imply endorsement.

Example prompts

  • "Write a 'Rotaflow vs us' page for multi-location dental groups."
  • "Write a 'Top 7 Rotaflow alternatives' page that includes us honestly."
  • "Refresh our comparison page pricing table and FAQ."

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free