Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

afrexai-competitive-intelAfrexai 竞争情报

Agent Skill

afrexai-competitive-intel 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

20,025

周安装

818

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

6,479
OpenClaw

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT-0

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:afrexai-competitive-intel(Afrexai 竞争情报)
来源仓库:https://github.com/1kalin/afrexai-competitive-intel
安装命令:
openclaw skills install afrexai-competitive-intel
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install afrexai-competitive-intel

简介

Afrexai Competitive Intel 构建全方位竞争情报分析框架,含产品拆解与定价对比。

  • 适用于市场进入决策、产品定位调整与营销策略优化场景。
  • 输出战斗卡牌与输赢洞察报告,辅助高层战略讨论。
  • 数据整理应合法合规,避免爬取受版权保护内容或侵犯隐私信息。
  • 情报解读需结合企业自身资源禀赋,避免盲目对标导致方向偏差。

SKILL.md

name
afrexai-competitive-intel
description
Complete competitive intelligence system — market mapping, product teardowns, pricing intel, win/loss analysis, battlecards, and strategic monitoring. Goes far beyond SEO to cover the full business landscape.

Competitive Intelligence Engine

A complete system for understanding, tracking, and outmaneuvering competitors. Covers market mapping, product analysis, pricing intelligence, sales battlecards, win/loss analysis, and ongoing monitoring.

When to Use

  • Entering a new market or launching a product
  • Losing deals to competitors and need to understand why
  • Quarterly strategy reviews
  • Pricing decisions (new product or adjustment)
  • Sales team needs competitive talking points
  • M&A due diligence on a target or acquirer
  • Investor pitch prep (show you understand the landscape)
  • Content strategy informed by competitor gaps

Phase 1: Market Mapping

1.1 Competitor Identification

Classify every competitor into one of four tiers:

TierDefinitionExampleMonitoring Frequency
DirectSame product, same buyerYour closest rivalsWeekly
AdjacentDifferent product, overlapping buyerPlatform expanding into your spaceBi-weekly
IndirectDifferent solution to same problemSpreadsheets replacing your SaaSMonthly
EmergingEarly-stage, same visionYC startups in your categoryMonthly

Discovery Methods

Search these sources systematically:

  1. Google: "[your category] software/tool/service" — note top 10 organic + ads
  2. G2/Capterra/TrustRadius: Your category page — note top 10 by reviews
  3. Product Hunt: Search your keywords — sort by votes
  4. Crunchbase: Search your category — filter funded companies
  5. LinkedIn: "[competitor name]" company pages — note employee count trends
  6. Reddit/HN: "alternative to [leader]" or "[category] recommendations"
  7. Customer interviews: "Who else did you evaluate?"
  8. Lost deal notes: Who did you lose to and why?

Market Map YAML

market_map:
  category: "[Your Category]"
  date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
  total_addressable_market: "$XB"
  
  competitors:
    - name: "Competitor A"
      tier: "direct"
      website: "https://..."
      founded: 2019
      funding: "$50M Series B"
      estimated_revenue: "$10-20M ARR"
      employee_count: 150
      employee_trend: "growing"  # growing | stable | shrinking
      hq: "San Francisco, CA"
      key_customers: ["Customer 1", "Customer 2"]
      primary_market: "mid-market"  # smb | mid-market | enterprise
      positioning: "All-in-one platform for X"
      strengths: ["Feature A", "Strong brand"]
      weaknesses: ["Expensive", "Slow support"]
      threat_level: "high"  # low | medium | high | critical
      notes: ""

Phase 2: Product Teardown

2.1 Feature Matrix

For each direct competitor, build a feature comparison:

feature_matrix:
  last_updated: "YYYY-MM-DD"
  
  categories:
    - name: "Core Features"
      features:
        - name: "Feature X"
          us: "full"       # none | partial | full | superior
          competitor_a: "full"
          competitor_b: "partial"
          weight: 5        # 1-5 importance to buyer
          notes: "We have deeper customization"
          
        - name: "Feature Y"
          us: "none"
          competitor_a: "full"
          competitor_b: "full"
          weight: 3
          notes: "On our roadmap for Q3"
    
    - name: "Integrations"
      features:
        - name: "Salesforce"
          us: "full"
          competitor_a: "partial"
          weight: 4

2.2 Product Teardown Template

For each major competitor, conduct a structured teardown:

## [Competitor Name] Product Teardown
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Analyst:** [name]

### First Impressions (0-5 min)
- Homepage messaging: What problem do they lead with?
- Sign-up friction: How many steps? What info required?
- Time to value: How fast can you DO something?
- Design quality: Modern, dated, cluttered, clean?

### Onboarding (5-30 min)
- Guided tour? Checklist? Video? Nothing?
- Sample data provided? Sandbox mode?
- How quickly did you feel competent?
- What confused you?

### Core Workflow
- Complete their primary use case end-to-end
- Note: steps required, clicks per task, speed, error handling
- Screenshot key screens

### Differentiators
- What can they do that we can't? (be honest)
- What's their "magic moment"?
- What do their happiest customers praise? (check G2 reviews)

### Weaknesses
- Where did you get stuck?
- What felt missing or half-baked?
- What do their angriest customers complain about? (check G2 1-2 star reviews)

### Pricing vs Value
- What plan would a typical customer need?
- Price per user/month at that tier?
- Any hidden costs (implementation, support, integrations)?
- Free trial? Freemium? Money-back guarantee?

### Technical Assessment
- Stack: (check Wappalyzer, BuiltWith, job postings)
- API: Public? REST/GraphQL? Rate limits? Docs quality?
- Mobile: Native app? Responsive web? PWA?
- Performance: Page load speed, UI responsiveness
- Uptime: Status page? Historical incidents?

2.3 UX Scoring Rubric

Score each competitor's product (0-10 per dimension):

DimensionWhat to EvaluateWeight
Ease of SetupTime to first value, onboarding friction15%
Core UXPrimary workflow efficiency, intuitiveness25%
Feature DepthCovers edge cases, power user needs20%
ReliabilityUptime, bugs encountered, error handling15%
IntegrationsEcosystem breadth, API quality10%
SupportResponse time, quality, self-serve resources10%
MobileNative quality, feature parity5%

Total = weighted sum. Compare across competitors.


Phase 3: Pricing Intelligence

3.1 Pricing Comparison Table

pricing_intel:
  date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
  
  competitors:
    - name: "Us"
      model: "per-seat"  # per-seat | usage | flat | hybrid | freemium
      entry_price: "$29/user/mo"
      mid_price: "$79/user/mo"
      enterprise_price: "Custom"
      free_tier: true
      free_limits: "5 users, 1000 records"
      annual_discount: "20%"
      contract_required: false
      implementation_fee: "$0"
      hidden_costs: []
      
    - name: "Competitor A"
      model: "per-seat"
      entry_price: "$49/user/mo"
      mid_price: "$99/user/mo"
      enterprise_price: "Custom ($150+/user)"
      free_tier: false
      annual_discount: "15%"
      contract_required: true  # annual minimum
      implementation_fee: "$5,000"
      hidden_costs: ["API access on enterprise only", "SSO $50/user extra"]

3.2 Price Positioning Analysis

Answer these questions:

  1. Where do we sit? Map all competitors on a 2x2: Price (low→high) vs Feature depth (basic→advanced)
  2. Who's cheapest? At 10 users? 50 users? 200 users? (pricing often crosses over at scale)
  3. Total Cost of Ownership: Include implementation, training, migration, hidden fees
  4. Value ratio: Features-per-dollar compared to each competitor
  5. Pricing trend: Are competitors raising prices? (check Wayback Machine on /pricing)
  6. Discount behavior: Do they discount aggressively in deals? (ask sales team, check G2 reviews mentioning price)

3.3 Pricing Strategy Recommendations

Based on analysis, recommend one of:

StrategyWhen to UseRisk
PremiumClearly superior product + brandLosing price-sensitive deals
ParitySimilar product, compete on other axesRace to bottom
PenetrationNew entrant, need market share fastPerception of low quality
ValueBetter product at lower priceMargin pressure if costs rise
NicheSpecialized for segment competitors ignoreSmall TAM

Phase 4: Sales Battlecards

4.1 Battlecard Template

Create one per direct competitor:

# 🏆 Battlecard: Us vs [Competitor]
**Last Updated:** YYYY-MM-DD | **Confidence:** High/Medium/Low

## Quick Stats
| Metric | Us | Them |
|--------|-----|------|
| Founded | | |
| Funding | | |
| Est. Revenue | | |
| Employees | | |
| G2 Rating | | |
| Gartner Position | | |

## Their Pitch (in their words)
"[Their homepage headline or elevator pitch]"

## Why Customers Choose Us Over Them
1. **[Reason 1]**: [Specific proof point — customer quote, metric, demo moment]
2. **[Reason 2]**: [Specific proof point]
3. **[Reason 3]**: [Specific proof point]

## Why Customers Choose Them Over Us (be honest)
1. **[Reason 1]**: [And how to counter it]
2. **[Reason 2]**: [And how to counter it]

## Landmines to Plant 🧨
Questions to ask the prospect that expose competitor weaknesses:
1. "Ask them how they handle [weakness area] — you'll find it requires [workaround]"
2. "Request a demo of [specific feature] — it's not as deep as it looks"
3. "Ask about [hidden cost] — it's not on the pricing page"

## Objection Handling

**"[Competitor] is cheaper"**
> Response: "At first glance, yes. But when you factor in [hidden cost 1], [hidden cost 2], and [limitation requiring workaround], the total cost is actually [higher/comparable]. Plus, [our unique value] saves you [X hours/dollars] per [period]."

**"[Competitor] has [feature we lack]"**
> Response: "[Acknowledge honestly]. Here's why our customers find that [our approach] actually works better for [their use case]: [specific reasoning]. [Customer name] evaluated both and chose us specifically because [reason]."

**"We're already using [Competitor]"**
> Response: "That makes sense — they're solid at [genuine strength]. The customers who switch to us typically hit a wall with [specific limitation]. Are you experiencing [common pain point with that competitor]?"

## Trap Plays (When to Walk Away)
- If prospect needs [specific capability we truly lack], acknowledge it honestly
- If they're deeply embedded in [competitor ecosystem], switching cost may be too high
- If deal size is below $[X], cost of competing isn't worth it

## Win Stories
- **[Customer A]**: Switched from [Competitor] because [reason]. Result: [metric improvement]
- **[Customer B]**: Evaluated both, chose us because [reason]. Quote: "[testimonial]"

## Recent Intel
- [Date]: [Competitor] announced [product change/funding/hire]
- [Date]: [Customer feedback about competitor]

4.2 Quick Objection Matrix

For the sales team's daily use:

ObjectionShort ResponseProof Point
"Too expensive"[Value reframe][ROI stat or customer quote]
"Never heard of you"[Social proof][Customer logos, G2 rank]
"Missing [feature]"[Alternative or roadmap][Workaround or timeline]
"Happy with current tool"[Trigger question][Common pain with incumbent]
"Need enterprise features"[What we have][Enterprise customer reference]

Phase 5: Win/Loss Analysis

5.1 Win/Loss Interview Framework

After every significant deal (won or lost), capture:

win_loss:
  deal: "[Company Name]"
  date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
  outcome: "won"  # won | lost | no-decision
  deal_size: "$X ARR"
  sales_cycle_days: 45
  competitors_evaluated: ["Competitor A", "Competitor B"]
  
  decision_factors:
    - factor: "Ease of use"
      importance: 5  # 1-5
      our_score: 4   # 1-5
      winner_score: 3
      notes: "Demo experience was decisive"
      
    - factor: "Price"
      importance: 4
      our_score: 3
      winner_score: 4
      notes: "We were 20% more expensive but justified by ROI"
      
    - factor: "Integration with Salesforce"
      importance: 5
      our_score: 5
      winner_score: 2
      notes: "They required middleware; we're native"
  
  champion: "VP of Sales"
  decision_maker: "CRO"
  buying_trigger: "Previous tool couldn't scale past 50 users"
  
  key_quote: "Your Salesforce integration sealed the deal"
  
  lessons:
    - "Lead with integration story for Salesforce-heavy orgs"
    - "ROI calculator was critical for justifying premium price"

5.2 Win/Loss Trend Dashboard

Track quarterly:

## Q[X] Win/Loss Summary

### Win Rate by Competitor
| Competitor | Wins | Losses | Win Rate | Trend |
|-----------|------|--------|----------|-------|
| Competitor A | 12 | 8 | 60% | ↑ (was 50%) |
| Competitor B | 5 | 15 | 25% | ↓ (was 35%) |
| No competition | 20 | 3 | 87% | → |

### Top Win Reasons (ranked by frequency)
1. Ease of use (mentioned in 65% of wins)
2. Integration depth (55%)
3. Customer support (40%)

### Top Loss Reasons (ranked by frequency)
1. Price (mentioned in 70% of losses)
2. Missing [specific feature] (45%)
3. Incumbent relationship (30%)

### Action Items from This Quarter's Losses
1. [Feature gap] → Product team building for Q[X+1]
2. [Price objection] → New ROI calculator + case study
3. [Competitor strength] → Invest in [counter-strategy]

Phase 6: Ongoing Monitoring

6.1 Competitor Signal Tracking

Set up monitoring for each direct competitor:

SignalSourceFrequencyWhat to Look For
Product changesTheir changelog/blogWeeklyNew features, deprecations
Pricing changes/pricing page + WaybackMonthlyPrice increases, new tiers, model changes
HiringLinkedIn JobsBi-weeklyEngineering surge = new product. Sales surge = growth push
FundingCrunchbase, TechCrunchAs it happensNew round = aggressive expansion coming
LeadershipLinkedIn, pressAs it happensNew CEO/CRO = strategy shift likely
ReviewsG2, CapterraMonthlySentiment shifts, recurring complaints
ContentTheir blog, socialWeeklyMessaging changes, new positioning
CustomersPress releases, case studiesMonthlyLogos gained, industries targeted
CommunityReddit, HN, TwitterWeeklyComplaints, praise, feature requests

6.2 Weekly Intel Brief Template

## Competitive Intel Brief — Week of [Date]

### 🔴 Critical (action needed)
- [Competitor X] launched [feature] that directly competes with our [feature]
  - Impact: [assessment]
  - Recommended response: [action]

### 🟡 Notable (monitor)
- [Competitor Y] raised Series C ($40M) — expect aggressive hiring/marketing
- [Competitor Z] changed pricing model from per-seat to usage-based

### 🟢 Informational
- [Competitor X] published blog post about [topic]
- [Competitor Y] hiring 3 new enterprise AEs in EMEA

### Win/Loss This Week
- Won [Deal] vs [Competitor] — reason: [X]
- Lost [Deal] to [Competitor] — reason: [X]

6.3 Quarterly Competitive Review Agenda

  1. Market map update (15 min): Any new entrants? Any exits? Tier changes?
  2. Feature gap review (20 min): What did competitors ship? What should we respond to?
  3. Win/loss trends (15 min): Are we gaining or losing ground? Against whom?
  4. Pricing check (10 min): Any pricing changes? Is our positioning still right?
  5. Battlecard refresh (15 min): Update all active battlecards
  6. Strategic decisions (15 min): Based on all intel, what should we invest in / deprioritize?

Phase 7: Strategic Frameworks

7.1 Competitive Moat Assessment

Rate your moat and each competitor's (1-5):

Moat TypeDescriptionUsComp AComp B
Network EffectsProduct gets better with more users
Switching CostsPain of leaving increases over time
Data AdvantageProprietary data that improves product
BrandTrust, recognition, preference
Scale EconomiesCost advantages from size
RegulatoryLicenses, certifications, compliance
TechnologyPatents, proprietary tech, speed
EcosystemIntegrations, partnerships, marketplace

Total moat score = sum. Higher = harder to displace.

7.2 Competitor Response Prediction

For each major competitor move, predict their likely response to YOUR moves:

**If we [action]...**
- Competitor A will likely: [response] because [reasoning]
- Competitor B will likely: [response] because [reasoning]
- Timeline: [how fast they'll respond]
- Our counter-move: [what we do next]

7.3 Blue Ocean Opportunities

After mapping all competitors, look for:

  1. Underserved segments: Customer types everyone ignores (too small? too niche? too complex?)
  2. Unmet needs: Features/capabilities no one offers that customers actually want
  3. Experience gaps: The workflow everyone does poorly
  4. Business model innovation: Could you win by charging differently? (usage vs seat vs outcome-based)
  5. Channel gaps: Where are customers NOT being reached? (vertical communities, specific geographies, languages)

Edge Cases & Advanced Techniques

Stealth Competitors

  • Monitor patent filings in your space (Google Patents)
  • Watch YC/Techstars demo days for category entrants
  • Track job postings at big tech for [your category] keywords — could signal internal build

International Competitors

  • Search in target language for your category
  • Check local review sites (Capterra has country-specific)
  • Different markets have different leaders — map per region

Platform Risk

  • If you build on a platform (Salesforce, Shopify, etc.), monitor the platform itself
  • Platforms often build features that commoditize plugins
  • Track platform's acquisition history in your space

Competitor Intelligence Ethics

  • ✅ Public information (websites, press, job postings, reviews, patents)
  • ✅ Customer feedback about competitors (win/loss interviews)
  • ✅ Product trials and demos (sign up normally)
  • ❌ Fake identities to access gated content
  • ❌ Poaching employees for intel
  • ❌ Accessing confidential documents
  • ❌ Reverse engineering protected code

Natural Language Commands

CommandWhat It Does
"Map my competitive landscape"Full Phase 1 market mapping
"Tear down [competitor]"Product teardown (Phase 2)
"Compare pricing with [competitors]"Pricing intelligence (Phase 3)
"Build battlecard for [competitor]"Sales battlecard (Phase 4)
"Analyze our win/loss data"Win/loss patterns (Phase 5)
"Weekly competitive brief"Monitoring summary (Phase 6)
"Assess our competitive moat"Strategic analysis (Phase 7)
"Find blue ocean opportunities"Gap analysis (Phase 7.3)
"How should we respond to [competitor move]?"Response prediction (Phase 7.2)
"Full competitive review"All phases, comprehensive output

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

OpenClaw

92.51%
按下载量换算5,994

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

未展示

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills