competitive-analysis

name	competitive-analysis
description	Analyze competing products, tools, or approaches and produce a structured comparison report

Competitive Analysis

When to Use

Use this skill when tasked with comparing competing products, tools, services, vendors, or approaches. This is for evaluating external options against each other and against organizational needs — not for comparing internal code implementations (use the analyst/comparative-analysis skill for weighted scoring of internal options).

Common scenarios:

• Evaluating vendor products for procurement decisions
• Comparing open-source tools for adoption
• Assessing competitive landscape for strategic planning
• Benchmarking current tooling against alternatives

Output Template

# Competitive Analysis: [Category]

**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Analyst:** [agent name]
**Decision Context:** [What decision does this analysis support?]

## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentences: how many options evaluated, which stands out, why]

## Options Evaluated
| # | Option | Category | Version/Date | Source |
|---|--------|----------|--------------|--------|
| 1 | [name] | [type] | [version] | [where info came from] |

## Comparison Matrix

| Criterion | [Option A] | [Option B] | [Option C] |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
| [criterion 1] | [value] | [value] | [value] |
| [criterion 2] | [value] | [value] | [value] |

## Individual Assessments

### [Option A]
**Strengths:**
- [Strength 1 — with specific evidence]
- [Strength 2]

**Weaknesses:**
- [Weakness 1 — with specific evidence]
- [Weakness 2]

**Best Fit For:** [scenario where this option wins]

### [Option B]
...

## Recommendation
**Recommended option:** [name]
**Rationale:** [3-5 sentences explaining why, referencing specific criteria]
**Caveats:** [conditions under which this recommendation would change]

## Sources
| # | Source | Type | Reliability | Notes |
|---|--------|------|-------------|-------|
| 1 | [name/path] | [doc/spec/article] | [High/Medium/Low] | [brief note] |

Procedure

1. Define the Analysis Scope

# Read the task to extract what needs comparing
TASK_ID="$1"
bash /home/shared/scripts/task.sh get "$TASK_ID" | jq -r '.description'

Document these before proceeding:

• Category: What type of thing are we comparing? (e.g., "CI/CD platforms", "cloud storage providers")
• Decision context: What decision does this support? Who is the decision-maker?
• Options: List all options to evaluate (aim for 3-5; fewer is shallow, more is unfocused)
• Constraints: Budget limits, must-have requirements, deal-breakers

2. Gather Information on Each Option

TOPIC="$2"  # e.g., "terraform" or "ci-cd-tools"

# Search workspace for any existing research, docs, or references
rg -l -i "$TOPIC" ~/workspace/ /home/shared/ 2>/dev/null | head -30

# Search for comparison docs that may already exist
find ~/workspace/ /home/shared/ -name '*.md' -o -name '*.txt' -o -name '*.csv' \
  | xargs grep -li "compar\|versus\|vs\.\|alternative" 2>/dev/null

# Check for any data files with product/tool information
find /home/shared/ -name '*.json' -o -name '*.csv' -o -name '*.yaml' \
  | xargs grep -li "$TOPIC" 2>/dev/null

# Read any input files specified in the task
INPUT_DIR="/home/shared/inputs"
if [ -d "$INPUT_DIR" ]; then
  find "$INPUT_DIR" -type f | while read f; do
    echo "=== $f ==="
    head -50 "$f"
    echo ""
  done
fi

For each option, create a structured fact file:

OPTION="option-a"
mkdir -p /tmp/competitive-analysis

cat > "/tmp/competitive-analysis/${OPTION}.md" <<'EOF'
# Option: [Name]

## Basic Facts
- **Full name:**
- **Category:**
- **Version/Release date:**
- **Vendor/Maintainer:**
- **Pricing model:**
- **License:**

## Capabilities
- [capability 1]
- [capability 2]

## Limitations
- [limitation 1]
- [limitation 2]

## Evidence
- Source: [path/reference] — [what it says]
EOF

3. Define Evaluation Criteria

Criteria must be specific and measurable. Avoid vague criteria like "ease of use."

cat > /tmp/competitive-analysis/criteria.md <<'EOF'
| # | Criterion | Definition | Measurement | Weight |
|---|-----------|-----------|-------------|--------|
| 1 | [name] | [what exactly this means] | [how to measure/assess] | [H/M/L] |
| 2 | | | | |
| 3 | | | | |
| 4 | | | | |
| 5 | | | | |
EOF

Good criteria examples:

• "Supports SSO via SAML 2.0" (specific, verifiable)
• "First-year total cost for 50 users" (quantifiable)
• "Time to complete standard onboarding workflow" (measurable)

Bad criteria examples:

• "User-friendly" (subjective, undefined)
• "Good support" (vague)
• "Modern" (meaningless)

4. Build the Comparison Matrix

# Create a CSV comparison matrix for structured analysis
MATRIX_FILE="/tmp/competitive-analysis/matrix.csv"

# Build header row from options
echo "criterion,weight,option_a,option_b,option_c" > "$MATRIX_FILE"

# Add rows for each criterion
# Use specific values: numbers, yes/no, or short factual descriptions
cat >> "$MATRIX_FILE" <<'EOF'
SSO Support,H,SAML+OIDC,SAML only,No
Annual Cost (50 users),H,$12000,$8500,$15000
API Rate Limit,M,10000/hr,5000/hr,Unlimited
Setup Time (estimated),M,2 weeks,1 week,3 weeks
Active Community Size,L,15000 GitHub stars,2000,45000
EOF

Render the matrix as a readable table:

# Pretty-print the CSV matrix
column -t -s',' "$MATRIX_FILE"

5. Assess Strengths and Weaknesses

For each option, extract strengths and weaknesses from the gathered facts:

# Generate structured assessment per option
python3 <<'PYEOF'
import csv

with open("/tmp/competitive-analysis/matrix.csv") as f:
    reader = csv.DictReader(f)
    rows = list(reader)

options = [k for k in rows[0].keys() if k not in ("criterion", "weight")]

for opt in options:
    print(f"\n## {opt}")
    strengths = []
    weaknesses = []
    for row in rows:
        val = row[opt]
        criterion = row["criterion"]
        weight = row["weight"]
        # Collect all values for this criterion to compare
        all_vals = [row[o] for o in options]
        # Flag as strength if this appears to be the best value
        # Flag as weakness if this appears to be the worst value
        print(f"  {criterion} ({weight}): {val}")
PYEOF

6. Formulate Recommendation

The recommendation must:

1. Name a specific option
2. Reference at least 3 criteria from the matrix that support it
3. Acknowledge what is sacrificed by not choosing alternatives
4. State conditions that would change the recommendation

7. Write the Report

REPORT_FILE="/home/shared/competitive-analysis-$(date +%Y%m%d)-${TOPIC}.md"

cat > "$REPORT_FILE" <<'REPORT'
# Competitive Analysis: [Category]

**Date:** $(date +%Y-%m-%d)
**Analyst:** $(hostname)
**Decision Context:** [What decision this supports]

## Executive Summary

[2-3 sentences summarizing the analysis and top-level finding]

## Options Evaluated

| # | Option | Category | Version/Date | Source |
|---|--------|----------|--------------|--------|
| 1 | [name] | [type] | [version] | [source] |
| 2 | [name] | [type] | [version] | [source] |
| 3 | [name] | [type] | [version] | [source] |

## Evaluation Criteria

| # | Criterion | Definition | Weight |
|---|-----------|-----------|--------|
| 1 | [name] | [what it means] | [H/M/L] |
| 2 | [name] | [what it means] | [H/M/L] |

## Comparison Matrix

| Criterion | Weight | [Option A] | [Option B] | [Option C] |
|-----------|--------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
| [name] | H | [value] | [value] | [value] |
| [name] | M | [value] | [value] | [value] |

## Individual Assessments

### [Option A]
**Strengths:**
- [Strength with evidence from matrix]

**Weaknesses:**
- [Weakness with evidence from matrix]

**Best Fit For:** [specific scenario]

### [Option B]
...

### [Option C]
...

## Recommendation

**Recommended option:** [name]

**Rationale:** [Why this option, citing specific criteria values from the matrix. Reference at least 3 data points.]

**What you give up:** [Specific advantages of non-recommended options that are sacrificed]

**Conditions that would change this recommendation:**
- If [condition], then [alternative option] would be preferred
- If [constraint changes], reconsider [option]

## Sources

| # | Source | Type | Reliability | Notes |
|---|--------|------|-------------|-------|
| 1 | [path/ref] | [type] | [H/M/L] | [note] |
REPORT

echo "Report written to: $REPORT_FILE"

8. Register as Artifact and Notify

bash /home/shared/scripts/artifact.sh register \
  --name "competitive-analysis-${TOPIC}" \
  --type "analysis" \
  --path "$REPORT_FILE" \
  --description "Competitive analysis of ${TOPIC} options"

# Notify requesting agent
bash /home/shared/scripts/send-mail.sh \
  --to "$REQUESTING_AGENT" \
  --subject "Competitive analysis complete: ${TOPIC}" \
  --body "Report available at: $REPORT_FILE"

Quality Checklist

• At least 3 options are evaluated (not just 2)
• Every criterion is specific and measurable (no vague terms like "good" or "easy")
• Comparison matrix uses factual values, not opinions
• Each option has both strengths AND weaknesses identified
• Recommendation cites at least 3 specific data points from the matrix
• Trade-offs of the recommendation are explicitly stated
• Conditions for changing the recommendation are documented
• All factual claims have a cited source
• Report is registered as an artifact in the shared workspace