shopping-hunter

name	shopping-hunter
description	Deep shopping research skill for finding products similar to a reference link or image, benchmarking global pricing, comparing quality/provenance, and creating a reusable buying dossier with links, per-item prices, shipping notes, and value-focused recommendations.

Shopping Hunter

Use this skill when the user wants to find, benchmark, compare, or source products similar to a reference item, image, aesthetic, material, maker, or buying goal. The default mode is deep global shopping research with Australia prioritized, AUD-normalized pricing, and a documented dossier.

Default operating mode

• Produce all of the following:
  • A buying dossier.
  • A concise shortlist of the best buys.
  • A market benchmark showing cheap, mid-market, premium, and high-end pricing.
• Prioritize Australia first, then global sources.
• Normalize prices to AUD primary, while preserving original currency and set size.
• Be value-focused: call out bargains, fair pricing, overpricing, provenance premiums, hidden shipping risk, and “cheap but not equivalent” alternatives.
• Prefer actual purchasable product links over inspiration-only pages.
• Include official brand/maker sites, marketplaces, local retailers, boutiques/design stores, secondhand/vintage listings, high-end benchmarks, and wholesale/B2B leads when relevant.
• Search deeply: use regional/source passes, price-tier passes, terminology/source-origin research, exact-source tracing, and high-end benchmarks.

Required intake questions

Before starting, ask for the missing items from this list. If the user already provided some, only ask for the missing/high-impact ones.

1. Reference link(s) and/or image(s).
2. What they like about the reference: colours, shape, material, finish, dimensions, provenance, vibe, brand, price, etc.
3. Budget or price bands to benchmark.
4. Must-have traits vs nice-to-have traits.
5. Regions to prioritize, with Australia as the default priority.
6. Whether vintage/used/one-off listings are acceptable.
7. Whether wholesale/B2B/MOQ sources are acceptable.
8. Quantity needed and whether sets are preferred.
9. Deal-breakers: materials, countries, shipping, lead times, ethics, returns, fragility, defects.
10. Whether to create a Markdown dossier file; default is yes.

If the user says “don’t hold back,” “deep search,” or similar, proceed with a deep multi-pass workflow and do not over-ask beyond truly missing constraints.

Research workflow

1. Parse the target

Extract a target profile:

• Product category and functional use.
• Visual traits.
• Materials and construction.
• Dimensions/capacity if relevant.
• Likely origin/provenance clues.
• Search vocabulary and synonyms.
• Known brand/source clues from the reference page.

Separate:

• Exact match: same brand/product/source.
• Close match: same material/process/aesthetic, different maker.
• Adjacent: same vibe, different process or quality.
• Budget lookalike: visually similar but materially different.
• Premium benchmark: higher-end equivalent for price context.

2. Run parallel research passes

When available, use parallel subagents or independent searches by scope. Good default passes:

• Exact-source tracing: same product, same brand, resellers, wholesale clues.
• Australia/NZ retailers.
• Etsy/global marketplace alternatives.
• Official brand/maker sites.
• US homeware/boutique sources.
• UK/EU homeware/boutique sources.
• Budget marketplace and mass-market alternatives.
• Wholesale/B2B/source-origin pass.
• High-end/designer/artisan benchmark.
• Search-terms/provenance map.

Do not duplicate work already delegated to an agent. Wait for required research before final synthesis when feasible.

3. Verify and normalize

For each candidate, capture:

• Product name.
• Merchant/seller.
• URL.
• Price as listed.
• Currency.
• Set size / quantity.
• Calculated per-item price.
• Approximate AUD per item.
• Shipping to Australia or availability notes.
• Materials and process.
• Origin/provenance.
• Dimensions/capacity.
• Similarity rating.
• Recommendation tier.
• Risk notes: blocked page, unverified price, vintage defect, MOQ, sold out, surface coating vs material colour, import/customs risk.

Never invent prices. If a price is from a snippet, archive, search result, or blocked page, label it clearly as unverified or partially verified.

4. Build the dossier

If the user wants a file, create a Markdown dossier in the session files folder unless they explicitly request a repository path. If the user explicitly asks for a repo file, create it where requested.

Recommended dossier structure:

1. Executive verdict.
2. Price bands / market map.
3. Best shortlist.
4. Exact-source findings.
5. Local/Australia options.
6. Global alternatives by region.
7. Budget/mass-market benchmarks.
8. Premium/high-end benchmarks.
9. Wholesale/source-origin leads.
10. Search terms and sourcing vocabulary.
11. Buying guidance.
12. Research limitations and unverifiable leads.

Use dense tables for product comparisons. Keep a short chat summary after creating the dossier and include the file path.

Recommendation style

Be direct and opinionated:

• Say which option is the best exact match.
• Say which option is the best value.
• Say which option is cheapest but materially different.
• Say which option is premium and why.
• Say whether the reference price looks fair, inflated, or unusually cheap.
• Explain when provenance, material, handmade process, or shipping justifies a higher price.

Quality rules

• Prefer current, live product pages, but include archived/snippet data when clearly labeled.
• Include sold-out/vintage listings only when useful for benchmarking or search vocabulary.
• Distinguish colour-in-glass from sprayed/painted/electroplated finishes.
• Distinguish handmade, mouth-blown, machine-made, pressed, molded, and studio-art products.
• Distinguish retail price from landed cost; shipping can dominate international purchases.
• Flag fragile/shipping-sensitive categories.
• Do not treat marketplace SEO claims as proven provenance without corroborating text.

Final response pattern

Lead with the outcome:

• “Created the dossier: <path>”
• “Best exact match: ...”
• “Best value: ...”
• “Price verdict: ...”

Keep the chat response concise; the dossier carries the detail.