dtsong/competitive-analysis
skills/council/scout/competitive-analysis/SKILL.md
Use when designing features that exist in competing products or analyzing prior art in the market. Covers feature mapping, UX evaluation, technical trade-off assessment, and differentiation opportunity identification. Do not use for evaluating individual libraries (use library-evaluation) or assessing technology maturity (use technology-radar).
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add dtsong/my-claude-setup competitive-analysisInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Apr 26, 2026, 4:24 AM66.4s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- competitive-analysis
- department:
- scout
- description:
- Use when designing features that exist in competing products or analyzing prior art in the market. Covers feature mapping, UX evaluation, technical trade-off assessment, and differentiation opportunity identification. Do not use for evaluating individual libraries (use library-evaluation) or assessing technology maturity (use technology-radar).
- version:
- 1
Competitive Analysis
Purpose
Map the landscape of competing products and prior art to identify proven patterns, differentiation opportunities, and lessons learned before building.
Scope Constraints
- Analyzes products and services at the feature and UX level, not individual code libraries.
- Focuses on identifying patterns, gaps, and differentiation — not producing marketing materials.
- Does not perform deep technical benchmarking; flag performance concerns for handoff.
Inputs
- Feature or product area to analyze
- Known competitors or similar products (or let the process discover them)
- Target user segment
- Specific aspects to compare (if any focus areas are known)
Input Sanitization
No user-provided values are used in commands or file paths. All inputs are treated as read-only analysis targets.
Procedure
Step 1: Identify Competing Products or Prior Art
- Direct competitors (same problem, same audience)
- Indirect competitors (different approach to the same underlying need)
- Prior art in adjacent domains (similar interaction patterns in different contexts)
- Open source alternatives
- Note market positioning of each (enterprise vs indie, free vs paid, general vs niche)
Step 2: Map Feature Sets
For each competitor, catalog:
- Core features (what they do well)
- Secondary features (nice-to-haves they include)
- Missing features (notable gaps)
- Unique features (things only they offer)
- Recent additions (direction they're heading)
Step 3: Evaluate UX and Interaction Approaches
For each competitor:
- Onboarding flow (how new users get started)
- Primary interaction model (how users accomplish the core task)
- Information architecture (how content and features are organized)
- Visual design language (aesthetic, density, tone)
- Notable UX innovations or frustrations
Step 4: Assess Technical Architecture Trade-offs
Where visible or inferable:
- Client-side vs server-side rendering approach
- Real-time vs polling vs static data
- Offline support and data sync strategy
- API design philosophy (REST, GraphQL, RPC)
- Performance characteristics (load time, responsiveness)
Step 5: Identify Gaps and Differentiation Opportunities
- Features competitors lack that users request (check forums, reviews, feature requests)
- UX frustrations users report across competitors
- Underserved user segments
- Technical advantages your stack enables
- Pricing or access model gaps
Step 6: Synthesize Lessons Learned
- What patterns are proven across multiple competitors (safe to adopt)?
- What approaches have competitors tried and abandoned (learn from their mistakes)?
- What is table stakes vs differentiating in this space?
- What would users switch for?
Progress Checklist
- [ ] Step 1: Competitors identified
- [ ] Step 2: Feature sets mapped
- [ ] Step 3: UX approaches evaluated
- [ ] Step 4: Technical trade-offs assessed
- [ ] Step 5: Gaps and opportunities identified
- [ ] Step 6: Lessons synthesized
Compaction resilience: If context was compacted, re-read this SKILL.md and check the Progress Checklist for completed steps before continuing.
Handoff
- If technical architecture concerns surface during competitor assessment, recommend loading architect/system-design for deeper analysis.
- If user research gaps are identified, recommend loading advocate/user-story for user-centered exploration.
Output Format
Feature Comparison Matrix
| Feature | Our Product | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C | |---------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------| | Feature 1 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | Feature 2 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
UX Approach Summary
| Aspect | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C | |--------|-------------|-------------|-------------| | Onboarding | ... | ... | ... | | Core interaction | ... | ... | ... | | Information architecture | ... | ... | ... | | Visual style | ... | ... | ... |
Differentiation Opportunities
- [Opportunity] — [Description and rationale]
- [Opportunity] — [Description and rationale]
- [Opportunity] — [Description and rationale]
Lessons from Prior Art
- Adopt: [Pattern] — proven across [competitors], users expect it
- Avoid: [Pattern] — [competitor] tried this and [outcome]
- Innovate: [Area] — no competitor has solved this well yet
Quality Checks
- [ ] At least 3 competitors or prior art examples analyzed
- [ ] Feature sets mapped comprehensively (not just top-level)
- [ ] UX approaches evaluated with specific observations
- [ ] Technical trade-offs assessed where inferable
- [ ] User pain points sourced from real feedback (reviews, forums)
- [ ] Differentiation opportunities are actionable
- [ ] Table stakes vs differentiators clearly distinguished
- [ ] Lessons include both what to adopt and what to avoid
Evolution Notes
<!-- Observations appended after each use -->Related Skills
dtsong/workflow
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Use when planning implementation steps, deciding commit format, or structuring development approach. Provides brainstorm-plan-implement flow with conventional commits. Triggers on 'how should I approach this', 'commit format'.
4SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 28, 2026
dtsong/web-security-hardening
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Security audit checklist for web applications. Use when reviewing, auditing, or hardening a web app's security posture. Covers rate limiting, auth headers, IP blocking, CORS, security middleware, input validation, file upload limits, ORM usage, and password hashing. Triggers on requests like "review security", "harden this app", "security audit", "check for vulnerabilities", or when building/reviewing API endpoints.
4SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 28, 2026
dtsong/web-design-guidelines
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Review UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "check accessibility", "audit design", "review UX", or "check my site against best practices".
4SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 28, 2026
dtsong/vercel-react-best-practices
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
React and Next.js performance optimization guidelines from Vercel Engineering. This skill should be used when writing, reviewing, or refactoring React/Next.js code to ensure optimal performance patterns. Triggers on tasks involving React components, Next.js pages, data fetching, bundle optimization, or performance improvements.
4SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 28, 2026