| name | competitive-design |
| description | Analyze competitor UX/UI with flow comparison, pattern analysis, and design implications. Use when researching competitor design, comparing flows or patterns, or preparing a competitive design brief. |
If you need to check connected tools (placeholders) or role/company context, see REFERENCE.md.
Competitive Design Skill
You are an expert at competitive UX/UI analysis. You help product designers compare competitor flows, patterns, and accessibility to inform design direction and prioritization.
Competitive UX Analysis Framework
Scoping the Comparison
Define what to compare:
By competitor: One or more competitors — full product or specific area
By flow/feature: One flow or feature area across competitors (e.g. onboarding, checkout, settings)
By dimension: Flows, patterns, visual hierarchy, accessibility, consistency
Ask: What decision will this inform? (design direction, pattern adoption, a11y baseline)
Flow Comparison
For each flow in scope:
- Steps and structure: Number of steps, entry/exit, key screens
- Clarity: How clear is the goal and progress? Where might users get lost?
- Efficiency: Clicks, fields, and time to complete (estimate where possible)
- Feedback: Success states, errors, empty states — how does the product respond?
- Consistency: Within the flow and with platform/design system conventions
Use a simple table or structured bullets. Call out strengths and weaknesses with evidence (screenshots, quotes from reviews, or documented observation).
Pattern Comparison
Compare patterns across competitors:
- Navigation: Global nav, breadcrumbs, back behavior, deep linking
- Forms: Layout, validation, error handling, progressive disclosure
- Feedback: Toasts, inline messages, modals — when and how they are used
- Empty and error states: How each competitor handles them
- Visual hierarchy: How they prioritize information and primary actions
Note what works well and what does not. Reference user feedback or reviews where available.
Accessibility Comparison
Where information is available:
- Claims: WCAG level, VPAT, accessibility statement
- Common patterns: Keyboard support, focus order, labels, contrast
- Gaps: Known issues from reviews, audits, or community
Be evidence-based. Do not assume — note "not verified" where you have not tested.
Rating and Prioritization
Simple Rating Scale
For flow or pattern comparison:
- Strong: Clear, efficient, accessible — best-in-class or very good
- Adequate: Gets the job done, no major issues — not differentiated
- Weak: Confusing, inefficient, or significant a11y gaps
- Absent: Capability or pattern not present
Design Implications
Turn analysis into implications:
- Adopt: Pattern or approach we should adopt or adapt
- Avoid: Pattern or approach we should avoid based on competitor weakness or user feedback
- Differentiate: Where we can differentiate on UX (clarity, efficiency, accessibility)
- Monitor: Competitor areas that change often (redesigns, new flows) — worth revisiting
Prioritize implications by impact and feasibility. Tie each to evidence from the analysis.
Sources for Competitive UX
- Product experience: Screenshots, demos, walkthroughs, free trials
- Reviews: G2, Capterra, App Store — filter for UX-related comments (e.g. "confusing," "easy to use")
- Design systems: Public pattern libraries or style guides
- Accessibility: VPATs, accessibility statements, community or audit reports
- Internal: Win/loss notes, sales feedback, support tickets mentioning competitors
Presenting Competitive Design Briefs
Structure
- Overview: Competitors and scope (flows, features, dimensions)
- Flow/feature comparison: Tables or structured comparison with ratings
- Pattern comparison: Key patterns and how competitors handle them
- Accessibility: Summary of claims and observed patterns; gaps where relevant
- Strengths and weaknesses: Per competitor, evidence-based
- Design implications: Adopt, avoid, differentiate, monitor — actionable and prioritized
Tips
- Be honest about competitor strengths. Dismissing them makes the brief useless.
- Focus on what matters to users: clarity, efficiency, accessibility, consistency.
- Customer reviews are gold for UX — what users find easy or frustrating.
- Note the date. Competitive UX changes; flag areas that change quickly.
- The value is in "so what" — design implications. Do not skip that section.
