agentsclimarketplace

Competitor teardown

Skill Abhillashjadhav/PM-agent-OS/.claude/skills/competitor-teardown

Evidence-aware product-management skills and reviewer agents for discovery, strategy, build, launch, and iteration.

Install
npx -y skills add Abhillashjadhav/PM-agent-OS --skill competitor-teardown

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

3 things to look at

  • 29 days oldThe repository was created 29 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
  • no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
  • 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Discovery-stage skill: turns material about a competitor's product — pricing pages, docs, changelogs, screenshots, customer reports — into a structured teardown where every claim is marked observed or inferred. Use when the user names a competitor product and asks for a teardown, competitive analysis, or comparison — 'tear down X', 'how does our Y compare to theirs', 'what is X doing with their pricing' — or when /pm routes such a request here. Do NOT use to write positioning or battlecards (Strategy stage), to scrape or collect the competitor data itself, for company-culture questions, or when no competitor material or product is identified — with nothing to observe it asks for material rather than inventing findings.

SKILL.md

4.5 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Competitor Teardown

Material in, teardown out — with a bright line between what was seen and what is being guessed.

Verification gates (defined first; output is blocked until all pass)

  • G1 — Every claim tagged: each factual claim carries exactly one of [OBSERVED: <source>] or [INFERRED: <basis>]. An untagged claim fails the gate.
  • G2 — No invented facts: every OBSERVED tag traces to material in the input (or material the skill actually fetched and quoted this session). Unknowns are written as "not determinable from input" — never filled with plausible numbers, features, or absences.
  • G3 — Inferences grounded and unchained: every INFERRED tag states its basis from observed material; an inference may not be the sole basis for a further inference presented as a finding.

Steps

  1. Inventory the material. List what was provided (pricing page, changelog, N customer reports, screenshots) — this inventory is the universe OBSERVED tags may cite. No material and no fetchable source? Stop and ask for material.
  2. Extract observations. Pull concrete facts: prices, tiers, features named, release dates, quoted customer language. Single-source reports (one churned customer, one review) keep their provenance visible — "one customer reports X" is the observation; "X is true of the product" is not.
  3. Draw inferences — separately. Cadence → investment level, pricing structure → target segment, missing tier features → upsell strategy. Each with its stated basis. Mark confidence when the basis is thin.
  4. Structure the teardown: positioning & pricing · product surface · momentum/cadence · weaknesses & complaints · what we still don't know. The unknowns section is mandatory — an empty one means the teardown is overclaiming.
  5. Gate pass. Scan every sentence for untagged claims, verify each OBSERVED against the inventory, check each INFERRED for basis and chaining. Fix and re-run; maximum 2 repair loops, then report the failure instead of the output.

Output format

TEARDOWN: <product> (material: <inventory>)
POSITIONING & PRICING
- Pro is $12/user/mo, unlimited calendars [OBSERVED: pricing page]
- Enterprise price not determinable from input
- Targets mid-market teams, not solo users [INFERRED: per-seat pricing + SSO gating]
...
WHAT WE STILL DON'T KNOW
- <unknown> — how to find out: <source>
GATE CHECK: G1 pass (n/n claims tagged) · G2 pass · G3 pass

Hard rules

  1. Never state a fact about the competitor that isn't in the inventoried material. Plausible ≠ observed — especially absence claims ("they have no API") which require observed evidence of absence, not failure to mention.
  2. Never launder a single customer's complaint into a product-wide truth. Provenance ("one churned customer reports…") travels with the claim.
  3. Never invent pricing. A missing price is "not determinable from input", full stop.
  4. The "what we still don't know" section may never be empty — if it seems empty, the teardown is overclaiming somewhere; find it.

Limitations

  • The teardown is a snapshot of the provided material at its date; pricing pages and changelogs drift — re-verify before quoting in anything external.
  • OBSERVED means observed in the input, not independently verified — a doctored screenshot passes G2; source-checking the user's material is the user's job.
  • Inference quality depends on material breadth: a pricing page alone supports pricing inferences, not roadmap conclusions.
  • This skill analyzes; it does not collect. Fetching competitor pages at scale, or anything against a site's terms, is out of scope.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.