Skip to main content الرئيسية المنشئون seaworld008 commonly-used-high-value-skills competitive-teardown
competitive-teardown Run a structured competitive analysis on any product or company. Synthesizes data from pricing pages, app store reviews, job postings, SEO signals, and social media into actionable insights: feature matrices, SWOT, positioning maps, UX audits, and a stakeholder presentation template.
الانتقال إلى التثبيت سوق المهارات اكتشف واستكشف مهارات الذكاء الاصطناعي التي بناها المجتمع.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
عرض تفاصيل Prompt يتجاوز الأمر المباشر Prompt المخصّص للمراجعة. افحص المصدر قبل تشغيله.
npx skills add https://github.com/seaworld008/Commonly-used-high-value-skills --skill competitive-teardownيبقى الأمر في سطر واحد. مرّر أفقيًا لمراجعته كاملًا قبل النسخ.
تفضّل نسخة محلية؟ نزّل الملفات المتاحة حاليًا لدى SkillsMP.
تحميل Zip جاري التحميل... name competitive-teardown description Run a structured competitive analysis on any product or company. Synthesizes data from pricing pages, app store reviews, job postings, SEO signals, and social media into actionable insights: feature matrices, SWOT, positioning maps, UX audits, and a stakeholder presentation template. zh_description 用于竞品、teardown，支持产品研究、策略、界面和交付协作。 version 1.0.0 author seaworld008 source in-house source_url tags ["competitive", "design", "product", "teardown"] created_at 2026-03-04 updated_at 2026-03-20 quality 5 complexity intermediate
Competitive Teardown
Tier: POWERFULCategory: Product TeamDomain: Competitive Intelligence, Product Strategy, Market Analysis
Overview
Run a structured competitive analysis on any product or company. Synthesizes data from pricing pages, app store reviews, job postings, SEO signals, and social media into actionable insights: feature matrices, SWOT, positioning maps, UX audits, and a stakeholder presentation template.
Core Capabilities
Feature comparison matrix (scored 1-5 across 12 dimensions)
Pricing model analysis (per-seat, usage-based, flat rate)
SWOT analysis
Positioning map (2x2 matrix)
UX audit (onboarding, key workflows, mobile)
Content strategy gap analysis
Action item roadmap (quick wins / medium-term / strategic)
Stakeholder presentation template
When to Use
Before a product strategy or roadmap session
When a competitor launches a major feature or pricing change
Quarterly competitive review
Before a sales pitch where you need battle card data
When entering a new market segment
Data Collection Guide
1. Website Analysis
curl -s "https://competitor.com/pricing" | \
python3 -c "
import sys
from html.parser import HTMLParser
class TextExtractor(HTMLParser):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
self.text = []
def handle_data(self, data):
if data.strip():
self.text.append(data.strip())
p = TextExtractor()
p.feed(sys.stdin.read())
print('\n'.join(p.text[:200]))
"
curl -s "https://competitor.com/changelog" | grep -i "added\|new\|launched\|improved"
curl -s "https://competitor.com/sitemap.xml" | grep -oP '(?<=<loc>)[^<]+' | head -50
Key things to capture from the website:
Pricing tiers and price points
Feature lists per tier
Primary CTA and messaging
Case studies / customer logos (signals ICP)
Integration logos
Trust signals (certifications, compliance badges)
2. App Store Reviews
curl "https://itunes.apple.com/rss/customerreviews/id=[APP_ID]/sortBy=mostRecent/json" | \
python3 -c "
import sys, json
data = json.load(sys.stdin)
entries = data.get('feed', {}).get('entry', [])
for e in entries[1:]: # skip first (app metadata)
rating = e.get('im:rating', {}).get('label', '?')
title = e.get('title', {}).get('label', '')
content = e.get('content', {}).get('label', '')
print(f'[{rating}] {title}: {content[:200]}')
"
Review sentiment categories:
Praise → what users love (defend / strengthen these)Feature requests → unmet needs (opportunity gaps)Bugs → quality signalsUX complaints → friction points you can beat them on
3. Job Postings (Team Size & Tech Stack Signals)
import requests
def get_jobs (company_token ):
r = requests.get(f"https://boards-api.greenhouse.io/v1/boards/{company_token} /jobs" )
return r.json().get('jobs' , [])
jobs = get_jobs("competitor-name" )
departments = {}
for job in jobs:
dept = job.get('departments' , [{}])[0 ].get('name' , 'Unknown' )
departments[dept] = departments.get(dept, 0 ) + 1
print ("Team breakdown by open roles:" )
for dept, count in sorted (departments.items(), key=lambda x: -x[1 ]):
print (f" {dept} : {count} open roles" )
Signals from job postings:
Engineering volume → scaling vs. consolidatingSpecific tech mentions → stack (React/Vue, Postgres/Mongo, AWS/GCP)Sales/CS ratio → product-led vs. sales-led motionData/ML roles → upcoming AI featuresCompliance roles → regulatory expansion
4. SEO Analysis
curl "https://moz.com/api/free/v2/url-metrics?targets[]=competitor.com" \
-H "x-moz-token: YOUR_TOKEN"
curl "https://competitor.com/sitemap-posts.xml" | \
grep -oP '(?<=<loc>)[^<]+' | \
sed 's|.*/||' | \
tr '-' ' '
Top 20 organic keywords (intent: informational / navigational / commercial)
Domain Authority / backlink count
Blog publishing cadence and topics
Which pages rank (product pages vs. blog vs. docs)
5. Social Media Sentiment
curl "https://api.twitter.com/2/tweets/search/recent?query=%40competitor+OR+%22competitor+name%22&max_results=100" \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $TWITTER_BEARER_TOKEN " | \
python3 -c "
import sys, json
data = json.load(sys.stdin)
tweets = data.get('data', [])
for t in tweets:
print(t['text'][:150])
"
Scoring Rubric (12 Dimensions, 1-5) # Dimension 1 (Weak) 3 (Average) 5 (Best-in-class) 1 Features Core only, many gaps Solid coverage Comprehensive + unique 2 Pricing Confusing / overpriced Market-rate, clear Transparent, flexible, fair 3 UX Confusing, high friction Functional Delightful, minimal friction 4 Performance Slow, unreliable Acceptable Fast, high uptime 5 Docs Sparse, outdated Decent coverage Comprehensive, searchable 6 Support Email only, slow Chat + email 24/7, great response 7 Integrations 0-5 integrations 6-25 26+ or deep ecosystem 8 Security No mentions SOC2 claimed SOC2 Type II, ISO 27001 9 Scalability No enterprise tier Mid-market ready Enterprise-grade 10 Brand Generic, unmemorable Decent positioning Strong, differentiated 11 Community None Forum / Slack Active, vibrant community 12 Innovation No recent releases Quarterly Frequent, meaningful
Feature Comparison Matrix Template ## Feature Comparison Matrix
| Feature | [YOUR PRODUCT] | [COMPETITOR A] | [COMPETITOR B] | [COMPETITOR C] |
|---------|---------------|----------------|----------------|----------------|
| **Core Features** | | | | |
| [Feature 1] | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| [Feature 2] | 3 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| [Feature 3] | 4 | 3 | 5 | 1 |
| **Pricing** | | | | |
| Free tier | Yes | No | Limited | Yes |
| Starting price | $X/mo | $Y/mo | $Z/mo | $W/mo |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom | No | Custom |
| **Platform** | | | | |
| Web app | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Mobile iOS | 4 | 3 | 5 | 2 |
| Mobile Android | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 |
| API | 5 | 4 | 3 | 1 |
| **TOTAL SCORE** | **XX/60** | **XX/60** | **XX/60** | **XX/60** |
### Score Legend: 5=Best-in-class, 4=Strong, 3=Average, 2=Below average, 1=Weak/Missing
Pricing Analysis Template ## Pricing Analysis
### Model Comparison
| Competitor | Model | Entry | Mid | Enterprise | Free Trial |
|-----------|-------|-------|-----|------------|------------|
| [Yours] | Per-seat | $X | $Y | Custom | 14 days |
| [Comp A] | Usage-based | $X | $Y | Custom | 30 days |
| [Comp B] | Flat rate | $X | - | Custom | No |
| [Comp C] | Freemium | $0 | $Y | Custom | Freemium |
### Pricing Intelligence
- **Price leader:** [Competitor] at $X/mo for comparable features
- **Value leader:** [Competitor] - most features per dollar
- **Premium positioning:** [Competitor] - 2x market price, targets enterprise
- **Our position:** [Describe where you sit and why]
### Pricing Opportunity
- [e.g., "No competitor offers usage-based pricing — opportunity for SMBs"]
- [e.g., "All competitors charge per seat — flat rate could disrupt"]
- [e.g., "Freemium tier could capture top-of-funnel the others miss"]
SWOT Analysis Template ## SWOT Analysis: [COMPETITOR NAME]
### Strengths
- [e.g., "3x more integrations than any competitor"]
- [e.g., "Strong brand recognition in enterprise segment"]
- [e.g., "Best-in-class mobile UX (4.8 App Store rating)"]
### Weaknesses
- [e.g., "No free tier — losing top-of-funnel to freemium players"]
- [e.g., "Pricing complexity confuses buyers (3 pages of pricing)"]
- [e.g., "App store reviews cite slow support response"]
### Opportunities (for US)
- [e.g., "They have no presence in DACH — our opening"]
- [e.g., "Their API is limited — power users frustrated"]
- [e.g., "Recent layoffs in engineering suggest slower roadmap"]
### Threats (to Us)
- [e.g., "Well-funded — can undercut pricing for 12+ months"]
- [e.g., "Strong channel partner network we don't have"]
- [e.g., "Announced AI feature launching Q2 — may close our gap"]
Positioning Map HIGH VALUE
|
[COMP A] | [YOURS]
(feature-rich, | (balanced,
expensive) | mid-price)
|
COMPLEX ────────────┼──────────────── SIMPLE
|
[COMP B] | [COMP C]
(complex, | (simple,
cheap) | cheap)
|
LOW VALUE
Axes: X = Complexity (Simple ↔ Complex)
Y = Value delivered (Low ↔ High)
Bubble size = market share or funding
UX Audit Checklist ## UX Audit: [COMPETITOR]
### Onboarding Flow
- [ ] Time to first value (TTFV): ____ _ minutes
- [ ] Steps to activation: ____ _
- [ ] Email verification required? Yes / No
- [ ] Credit card required for trial? Yes / No
- [ ] Onboarding checklist / wizard? Yes / No
- [ ] Empty state quality: 1-5 ___
### Key Workflows
| Workflow | Steps | Friction Points | Our Score | Their Score |
|----------|-------|-----------------|-----------|-------------|
| [Core action 1] | X | [notes] | X/5 | X/5 |
| [Core action 2] | X | [notes] | X/5 | X/5 |
| [Core action 3] | X | [notes] | X/5 | X/5 |
### Mobile Experience
- iOS rating: __ ___ / 5 ([X] reviews)
- Android rating: __ ___ / 5 ([X] reviews)
- Mobile feature parity: Full / Partial / Web-only
- Top mobile complaint: __ ___
- Top mobile praise: __ ___
### Navigation & IA
- [ ] Global search available?
- [ ] Keyboard shortcuts?
- [ ] Breadcrumbs / clear navigation?
- [ ] Help / docs accessible in-app?
Action Items Template ## Action Items from Competitive Teardown
### Quick Wins (0-4 weeks, low effort, high impact)
- [ ] [e.g., "Add G2/Capterra badges — competitor displays these prominently"]
- [ ] [e.g., "Publish integration page — competitor's ranks for '[product] integrations'"]
- [ ] [e.g., "Add comparison landing page targeting '[competitor] alternative' keyword"]
### Medium-Term (1-3 months, moderate effort)
- [ ] [e.g., "Launch free tier to capture top-of-funnel competitor is missing"]
- [ ] [e.g., "Improve onboarding — competitor's TTFV is 4min vs our 12min"]
- [ ] [e.g., "Build [integration] — #1 request in competitor app store reviews"]
### Strategic (3-12 months, high effort)
- [ ] [e.g., "Enter DACH market — competitor has no German localization"]
- [ ] [e.g., "Build API v2 — power users leaving competitor for API limitations"]
- [ ] [e.g., "Achieve SOC2 Type II — competitor uses this as primary enterprise objection handler"]
Stakeholder Presentation Template # [COMPETITOR NAME] Teardown
## Competitive Intelligence Report — [DATE]
---
### Executive Summary (1 slide)
- Overall threat level: LOW / MEDIUM / HIGH / CRITICAL
- Their biggest strength vs. us: [1 sentence]
- Our biggest opportunity vs. them: [1 sentence]
- Recommended priority action: [1 sentence]
---
### Market Position (1 slide)
[Insert 2x2 positioning map]
---
### Feature Scorecard (1 slide)
[Insert 12-dimension radar chart or table]
Overall: [COMPETITOR] = XX/60 | [YOURS] = XX/60
---
### Pricing Analysis (1 slide)
[Insert pricing comparison table]
Key insight: [1-2 sentences]
---
### UX Highlights (1 slide)
What they do better: [3 bullets]
Where we beat them: [3 bullets]
---
### Voice of Customer (1 slide)
Top 3 complaints about [COMPETITOR] from reviews:
1. [Quote or paraphrase]
2. [Quote or paraphrase]
3. [Quote or paraphrase]
---
### Our Action Plan (1 slide)
Quick wins: [2-3 bullets]
Medium-term: [2-3 bullets]
Strategic: [1-2 bullets]
---
### Appendix
- Raw feature matrix
- Full review analysis
- Job posting breakdown
- SEO keyword comparison
Common Pitfalls
Recency bias - Pricing pages change; always date-stamp your dataFeature theater - A competitor may list a feature that barely works; check reviewsVanity metrics - "10,000 integrations" via Zapier != 10,000 native integrationsIgnoring momentum - A weaker competitor growing 3x YoY is a bigger threat than a stronger one shrinkingOnly comparing features - Brand perception and community often matter more than featuresSingle-source analysis - Website alone misses the real user experience; always add reviews
Best Practices
Run teardowns quarterly; competitors move fast
Assign a DRI (directly responsible individual) for each major competitor
Build a "battle card" 1-pager per competitor for sales to use
Track competitor job postings monthly as a leading indicator of product direction
Screenshot pricing pages — they change and you want the history
Include a "what we copied from them" section internally — intellectual honesty builds better products
المزيد من هذا المستودع Multi-agent collaboration plugin that spawns N parallel subagents competing on the same task via git worktree isolation. Agents work independently, results are evaluated by metric or LLM judge, and the best branch is merged. Use when: user wants multiple approaches tried in parallel — code optimization, content variation, research exploration, or any task that benefits from parallel competition. Requires: a git repo.
Design production-grade multi-agent orchestration systems. Covers five core patterns (sequential pipeline, parallel fan-out/fan-in, hierarchical delegation, event-driven, consensus), platform-specific implementations, handoff protocols, state management, error recovery, context window budgeting, and cost optimization.
App Store Optimization toolkit for researching keywords, optimizing metadata, and tracking mobile app performance on Apple App Store and Google Play Store.
المهن ذات الصلة SOC
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
