Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读github未标认证来源可访问clear审计提醒

competitive-analysis竞争分析

Agent Skill

competitive-analysis 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 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

419

周安装

18

GitHub Stars

8

下载量

147
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

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

3

许可证

MIT

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:competitive-analysis(竞争分析)
来源仓库:https://github.com/vamseeachanta/workspace-hub
仓库路径:skills/competitive-analysis
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/vamseeachanta/workspace-hub --skill competitive-analysis
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。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/vamseeachanta/workspace-hub --skill competitive-analysis

简介

competitive-analysis 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。

  • 适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中根据关键词或任务场景快速定位候选结果。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定仓库安装,需结合原始 README 确认具体用法。
  • 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。
  • 当前暂无更多细节,建议参考来源仓库了解具体实现方式。

SKILL.md

Competitive Analysis Skill

Overview

This skill provides comprehensive competitive intelligence capabilities including competitor identification, positioning analysis, battlecard creation, and ongoing market monitoring. Designed for B2B technical services differentiation.

Quick Start

  1. Identify competitors - Direct, indirect, status quo
  2. Analyze positioning - How they position vs. you
  3. Create battlecards - Sales enablement tools
  4. Monitor changes - Ongoing competitive tracking
  5. Adjust strategy - Differentiate and win

When to Use

  • Entering new markets
  • Losing deals to competitors
  • Positioning/messaging development
  • Sales enablement
  • Pricing strategy
  • Product roadmap input

Competitor Categories

Three-Tier Framework

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ TIER 1: Direct Competitors                   │
│ Same service, same market                    │
│ Example: Other offshore engineering firms    │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
           ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ TIER 2: Indirect Competitors                 │
│ Different approach, same problem             │
│ Example: In-house engineering teams          │
│          General engineering consultancies   │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
           ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ TIER 3: Status Quo                           │
│ Doing nothing / current solution             │
│ Example: Manual analysis processes           │
│          Spreadsheet-based calculations      │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Competitor Profile Template

## Competitor: [Company Name]

### Overview
- **Website:** [URL]
- **Founded:** [Year]
- **Size:** [Employees]
- **Location:** [HQ + offices]
- **Funding:** [If applicable]

### Positioning
- **Tagline:** [Their tagline]
- **Value Prop:** [Main message]
- **Target Market:** [Who they serve]

### Services/Products
| Service | Description | Pricing |
|---------|-------------|---------|
| | | |

### Strengths
1. [Strength 1]
2. [Strength 2]
3. [Strength 3]

### Weaknesses
1. [Weakness 1]
2. [Weakness 2]
3. [Weakness 3]

### Differentiation vs. Us
| Aspect | Them | Us | Our Advantage |
|--------|------|-----|---------------|
| Technology | | | |
| Expertise | | | |
| Pricing | | | |
| Support | | | |

### Recent Activity
- [Recent news/changes]
- [Product launches]
- [Customer wins]

### Competitive Win Rate
- Deals competed: [X]
- Wins: [Y]
- Win rate: [Z%]

Positioning Analysis

April Dunford Framework

For each competitor, analyze:

  1. Competitive Alternatives - What would customers use instead?
  2. Unique Attributes - What do they do that others can't?
  3. Value - What benefit does that provide?
  4. Target Customers - Who cares most about that value?
  5. Market Category - What market do they claim?

Positioning Map

                    HIGH SPECIALIZATION
                           │
                     ┌─────┼─────┐
                     │  US │     │
    LOW              │     │     │         HIGH
    TECH ────────────┼─────┼─────┼──────── TECH
                     │     │     │
                     │     │ Comp│
                     └─────┼─────┘
                           │
                    LOW SPECIALIZATION

Axes to consider:
- Price vs. Value
- Specialization vs. Generalist
- Technology vs. Traditional
- Speed vs. Thoroughness
- Custom vs. Standardized

Battlecard Template

Sales Enablement Battlecard

# Battlecard: [Competitor Name]

## Quick Facts
- **Who they are:** [1-line description]
- **When we compete:** [Common scenarios]
- **Win rate vs. them:** [X%]

## Their Pitch
> "[How they typically position themselves]"

## Our Counter
> "[How we differentiate]"

## Strengths to Acknowledge
| Their Strength | Our Response |
|----------------|--------------|
| [Strength 1] | [How we address/counter] |
| [Strength 2] | [How we address/counter] |

## Weaknesses to Exploit
| Their Weakness | Our Advantage | Proof Point |
|----------------|---------------|-------------|
| [Weakness 1] | [Our strength] | [Evidence] |
| [Weakness 2] | [Our strength] | [Evidence] |

## Discovery Questions
Questions to ask prospects to surface competitor weaknesses:
1. "[Question that reveals their pain point we solve better]"
2. "[Question about their experience with competitor approach]"
3. "[Question highlighting our differentiator]"

## Objection Handling
| Objection | Response |
|-----------|----------|
| "They're cheaper" | [Response] |
| "They have more experience" | [Response] |
| "We already use them" | [Response] |

## Landmines to Set
Early in sales process, position against competitor:
- "[Point that makes our approach seem necessary]"
- "[Requirement they can't meet]"

## Proof Points
- [Case study/testimonial relevant to this competitor]
- [Specific metric/result that beats them]

## Resources
- [Link to case study]
- [Link to comparison doc]
- [Link to detailed analysis]

Win/Loss Analysis

Interview Framework

## Win/Loss Interview: [Company Name]

### Deal Info
- **Outcome:** Won / Lost
- **Competitor:** [Who we competed against]
- **Deal Size:** [$X]
- **Sales Cycle:** [X days]

### Decision Criteria
What mattered most to them? (Rank 1-5)
- [ ] Price
- [ ] Technical capability
- [ ] Industry experience
- [ ] Speed/timeline
- [ ] Support/partnership
- [ ] References/reputation

### Evaluation Process
- Who was involved in decision?
- How did they evaluate options?
- What research did they do?

### If Won
- Why did they choose us?
- What almost made them not choose us?
- What would have made decision easier?

### If Lost
- Why did they choose competitor?
- What would have changed their decision?
- When did we lose (early/late)?
- Would they consider us in future?

### Insights for Improvement
- Product/service gaps?
- Sales process issues?
- Pricing feedback?
- Messaging that resonated/didn't?

Win/Loss Dashboard

MetricTargetActual
Overall win rate>35%[X%]
Win rate vs. Competitor A>40%[X%]
Win rate vs. Competitor B>30%[X%]
Deals lost to price<20%[X%]
Deals lost to features<15%[X%]

Competitive Monitoring

What to Track

CategoryItemsFrequency
WebsiteMessaging, pricing, featuresMonthly
SocialContent, engagement, campaignsWeekly
NewsPress releases, funding, hiresWeekly
ContentBlog, case studies, webinarsMonthly
SEORankings, keywords, backlinksMonthly
ReviewsG2, Capterra, industry reviewsMonthly

Monitoring Tools

## Free Tools
- Google Alerts - News mentions
- SimilarWeb - Traffic estimates
- BuiltWith - Technology stack
- LinkedIn - Company updates, hiring

## Paid Tools
- SEMrush/Ahrefs - SEO/content analysis
- Crayon/Klue - Competitive intelligence
- G2/Capterra - Review monitoring

Competitive Alert Template

## Competitive Alert: [Date]

### Company: [Competitor]

### Change Detected
- **Type:** [Pricing/Messaging/Feature/Hire/etc.]
- **Details:** [What changed]
- **Source:** [Where detected]

### Impact Assessment
- **Severity:** High / Medium / Low
- **Affected:** [Sales/Marketing/Product]

### Recommended Response
- [ ] Update battlecard
- [ ] Adjust messaging
- [ ] Sales team notification
- [ ] No action needed

### Notes
[Additional context]

Differentiation Strategy

Finding Differentiation

1. List competitor claims
2. Identify their gaps/weaknesses
3. Match to our strengths
4. Validate with customers
5. Build messaging around it

Differentiation Categories

TypeExampleSustainability
TechnologyAI-native approachMedium-High
ExpertiseSpecialized domain knowledgeHigh
ProcessTransparent methodologyMedium
SpeedFaster deliveryLow-Medium
PriceLower costLow
SupportBetter partnershipMedium

AceEngineer Differentiation

## Key Differentiators

### 1. AI-Native Engineering
- Not just using AI, built around AI
- Automated analysis pipelines
- Machine learning integration

### 2. Open Source Transparency
- Public code repositories
- Documented methodologies
- Verifiable approaches

### 3. Technical Depth + Innovation
- Deep domain expertise
- Modern technology adoption
- Continuous improvement

### Against Traditional Consultancies
"We deliver the same technical rigor with AI-powered
efficiency, transparent methodologies, and modern tools."

### Against In-House Teams
"We provide specialized expertise and advanced capabilities
without the overhead of building an internal team."

Best Practices

Do

  1. Focus on top 3-5 competitors
  2. Update battlecards quarterly
  3. Include sales team input
  4. Validate with win/loss data
  5. Monitor continuously
  6. Share insights cross-functionally

Don't

  1. Obsess over competitors
  2. Copy competitor strategy
  3. Compete on price alone
  4. Ignore indirect competitors
  5. Base strategy on assumptions
  6. Neglect status quo competition

Error Handling

IssueCauseSolution
Low win rate vs. specific competitorPoor differentiationDeeper analysis, adjust positioning
Outdated battlecardsNo monitoringSet up alerts, schedule updates
Sales not using battlecardsNot useful formatGet sales input, simplify
Surprised by competitor movesNo monitoringImplement tracking system

Metrics

MetricTargetFrequency
Competitive win rate>35%Quarterly
Battlecard usage>80%Monthly
Intel freshness<30 daysWeekly
Win/loss interviews80% of dealsPer deal

Competitive Research Methodology

Research Sources

Primary Sources (Direct from Competitor)

  • Website: homepage, product pages, pricing, about page, careers
  • Blog and resource center: content themes, publishing frequency, depth
  • Social media profiles: messaging, engagement, content strategy
  • Product demos and free trials: UX, features, onboarding experience
  • Webinars and events: topics, speakers, audience engagement
  • Press releases and newsroom: announcements, partnerships, milestones
  • Job postings: hiring signals that reveal strategic priorities

Secondary Sources (Third-Party)

  • Review sites: G2, Capterra, TrustRadius, Product Hunt -- customer sentiment themes
  • Analyst reports: Gartner, Forrester, IDC -- market positioning and category placement
  • News coverage: TechCrunch, industry publications -- funding, partnerships, narrative
  • Social listening: mentions, sentiment, share of voice across social platforms
  • SEO tools: keyword rankings, organic traffic estimates, content gaps
  • Financial filings: revenue, growth rate, investment areas (for public companies)
  • Community forums: Reddit, Discourse, industry Slack communities -- user sentiment

Research Process

  1. Set scope: define which competitors and what aspects to analyze
  2. Gather data: systematically collect information from sources above
  3. Organize findings: structure by competitor, then by dimension
  4. Analyze patterns: identify themes, strengths, weaknesses, and trends
  5. Compare to your position: map findings against your own positioning
  6. Synthesize insights: extract actionable takeaways and opportunities
  7. Date-stamp everything: competitive intelligence has a short shelf life

Research Cadence

  • Deep competitive analysis: quarterly
  • Competitive monitoring: monthly
  • Real-time alerts: ongoing

Messaging Comparison Frameworks

Messaging Matrix

DimensionYour CompanyCompetitor ACompetitor BCompetitor C
Tagline/Headline
Core value proposition
Primary audience
Key differentiator claim
Tone/Voice
Proof points used
Category framing
Primary CTA

Narrative Analysis

Identify each competitor's story arc:

  • Villain: what problem or enemy they position against
  • Hero: who is the hero in their story
  • Transformation: what before/after do they promise
  • Stakes: what happens if you do not act

Content Gap Analysis

Content Audit Comparison

Topic/ThemeYour ContentCompetitor ACompetitor BGap?

Identifying Content Opportunities

  1. Topics they cover that you do not
  2. Topics you cover that they do not
  3. Formats they use that you do not
  4. Audience segments they address that you do not
  5. Search terms they rank for that you do not

Related Skills

Sources


Version History

  • 1.1.0 (2026-02-03): Merged competitive research methodology, messaging comparison frameworks, and content gap analysis from anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins
  • 1.0.0 (2026-01-19): Initial release adapted from alirezarezvani/claude-skills

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

04

需要参考平台分布和安装热度时

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

Claude Code

28.51%
按下载量换算42

windsurf

26.05%
按下载量换算38

trae

16.5%
按下载量换算24

OpenCode

14.45%
按下载量换算21

Cursor

8.02%
按下载量换算12

Codex

3.15%
按下载量换算5

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills