Alternative

/alternative — "Alternatives to X" listicle page

Captures the highest-intent prospecting traffic on the web: people who have already decided their current option doesn't fit and are looking for replacements. The page lists 4–7 alternatives (including the site itself), ranks them per use case, and positions the site honestly — not always #1.

Inputs

Required (asked at start if not given):

• Site — must match a folder under sites/[name]/.
• Competitor being replaced — the named entity in the search query (alternatives to [HubSpot], [Mailchimp] alternatives).

Optional (per-run overrides):

• Alternative count — defaults to 5; valid range 4–7. Below 4 looks thin; above 7 dilutes per-alternative depth.
• Position — the site's slot in the list. Default: honest (skill picks slot based on real fit). Override: top (only if the site is genuinely the best fit for the broadest reader segment — refusal-checked).

Workflow

This skill follows /blog's workflow (Steps 0–11) with the page-type-specific differences listed below. Read .claude/skills/blog/SKILL.md end-to-end before running.

What's unique to /alternative

Step 2 — Keyword selection: pick from service-keywords.csv rows where intent=alternative, or accept user-supplied keyword. The keyword form is always alternatives to [X] or [X] alternatives.

Step 4 — SERP analysis (alternative-specific):

• Top 3 alternative pages — extract the LIST: which alternatives do they name? The intersection of all 3 = the "table stakes" alternatives that must appear on this page.
• Count: most ranking alternative pages list 5–10 options. Pick the median.
• Identify SERP-listed alternatives that are obviously weak (defunct products, niche-only tools) — those can be replaced with stronger but rarer picks.

Step 5 — Alternative selection (the editorial decision):

• Required alternatives: every option that appears in ≥ 2 of the top 3 SERP pages.
• Optional alternatives: pick 1–2 underrepresented but genuinely strong options to add (this is the page's differentiation move).
• The site itself: include as one of the N. Position determined honestly per fit.
• For each alternative, pull (web research):
  1. Their pricing (URL + date)
  2. Their primary positioning ("X is the [category] for [audience]")
  3. One real strength (cited)
  4. One real weakness (cited from G2/Capterra/Reddit)

Step 6 — Wireframe (alternative-specific):

• Hero: "The [N] best alternatives to [Competitor] in [year]" — year-anchored, ranking-implying.
• Quick answer (above fold): "If you're switching from [Competitor], the alternative you pick depends on [decision criterion]. Here's how the [N] options compare."
• TL;DR table (required): N rows × columns [Name, Best for, Starting price, Free tier]. Above the long-form sections.
• Per-alternative section (200–350 words each):
  • H2: "[N]. [Alternative name]"
  • "Best for:" one-sentence positioning
  • 2-paragraph evaluation: real strength + real weakness (both cited)
  • "Pricing:" current public price + date accessed
  • "Switch from [Competitor]:" sentence on migration difficulty
• Decision framework (required, after the list): 3–5 if-then statements. "If you need [X], pick [A]. If you need [Y], pick [B]." Site is named honestly in the if-then it actually wins.
• FAQ: 4–6 Qs — "Why isn't [option Z] on this list?", migration FAQs, pricing FAQs.

Step 7 — Schema (alternative-specific):

• Article (the listicle itself)
• ItemList with itemListElement = N entries, each pointing to a Product or Service (use mentions for competitors, full Product only for our own).
• FAQPage
• BreadcrumbList

Step 8 — Voice (alternative-specific extras):

• The site MUST NOT be #1 by default — that's the most-spammed pattern in this format and Google deprioritizes it. The site's slot is determined by genuine fit for the broadest reader segment.
• Every weakness claim about a named competitor MUST be cited (G2 review URL + date, Capterra URL + date, or their own changelog).
• "When NOT to switch" section — if the reader's use case isn't a fit for ANY of the N alternatives, tell them to stay. Bigger trust signal than any feature comparison.

Refusal conditions

This skill refuses to ship if:

• The competitor in the title is not a real, currently-active product/service.
• Position=top is requested but the site is not genuinely the broadest-fit option (per fit analysis).
• The site's voice.md forbids alternative-positioning pages (some brands don't position against competitors at all).
• A /alternative page for the same competitor already exists in used-keywords.md (refresh instead).

Output

Standard _drafts/[slug]/ layout, with these additions:

• alternative-list.md — the structured list as a standalone file (JSON-LD ItemList source-of-truth)
• sources.md — every citation used (URL + date)

Length target: 2,000–3,500 words. Listicles in this format need depth per item or they read as content marketing fluff.

Routine versioning + idempotency contract

Same as /blog. Idempotency key: (site, competitor-slug, language). Skip re-run if _drafts/alternatives-to-{competitor}/ exists with today's date.