Windsurf + Aider targets, MCP server, and demo placement (#33)

Broadens both reach (more tools) and content types (an MCP server), continuing
the multi-platform story.

Windsurf + Aider:
- build-exports.mjs gains two platforms: exports/windsurf/*.md (workspace rules,
  trigger: model_decision) and exports/aider/*.md (conventions for `aider --read`).
  Now 5 platforms (ChatGPT, Gemini, Cursor, Windsurf, Aider).
- install.sh + bin/cli.mjs install both (windsurf -> .windsurf/rules, aider ->
  .aider/skills with a --read hint); generated README index is excluded from copies.
- One-line windsurf-install.sh / aider-install.sh wrappers for parity.

MCP server (new content type):
- mcp/server.mjs — zero-dependency stdio MCP server exposing list_skills,
  search_skills, get_skill. Published as a second bin (pm-claude-skills-mcp).
  Logs to stderr; reads bundled skills/ at startup. mcp/README.md documents
  client config.

Also: README hero "See it in action" demo placement (ready to swap in a GIF;
recording guide in web/docs-assets/README.md), Works-With table + exports +
install docs updated, CHANGELOG Unreleased. package.json files/bin updated.


Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016JWn5jRD5tcEFKrubjQ6Px

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>

exports/windsurf/pm-strategy/competitor-signal-tracker/competitor-signal-tracker.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+---
+trigger: model_decision
+description: "Analyse competitor moves and translate them into strategic implications for your product roadmap. Use when a competitor announces a new feature, pricing change, partnership, or strategic shift, or when producing a periodic competitive intelligence report. Produces a categorised signal analysis with reactive-vs-proactive assessment, threat ratings, specific roadmap implications, and recommended responses with owners."
+---
+
+# Competitor Signal Tracker Skill
+
+Turn scattered competitor information into structured strategic intelligence — not just "what they did" but "what it means for us."
+
+## Required Inputs
+
+Ask the user for these if not provided:
+- **Competitor name(s)** and the signals/updates to analyse
+- **Your product's current roadmap or strategic priorities** (to assess relevance)
+- **Time period** the signals cover (this week, this month, etc.)
+
+## Signal Categories to Track
+- **Product signals:** New features, removals, UX changes, beta programmes
+- **Pricing signals:** Changes to tiers, free limits, enterprise terms
+- **Hiring signals:** Job postings that reveal strategic bets (e.g., hiring ML engineers = AI investment)
+- **Partnership signals:** Integrations, acquisitions, ecosystem moves
+- **Messaging signals:** Changes in positioning, target audience, value proposition
+
+## Process
+1. For each competitor update provided, categorise the signal type
+2. Assess: Is this reactive (responding to market) or proactive (setting direction)?
+3. Rate strategic threat level: High / Medium / Low / Watch
+4. Connect to your roadmap: does this accelerate, validate, or challenge any of your bets?
+5. Recommend a response: Accelerate existing initiative / Deprioritise / Monitor / Investigate further
+6. **Validate** — Confirm every High threat has a specific recommended response with an owner. "Monitor" is not an acceptable response for High-rated threats.
+
+## Output Structure
+
+### Competitive Intelligence Report — [Date]
+
+#### [Competitor Name]
+**Signal:** [What they did]
+**Signal Type:** [Product / Pricing / Hiring / Partnership / Messaging]
+**Reactive or Proactive:** [assessment]
+**Threat Level:** [High / Medium / Low / Watch]
+**Implication for Us:** [Specific connection to our roadmap or strategy]
+**Recommended Response:** [Action + owner + timeline]
+
+#### Strategic Summary
+[2-3 sentences on the overall competitive landscape shift this period]
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not rate a signal as High threat without explaining the specific roadmap item or customer segment it threatens — unjustified threat ratings lose credibility over time
+- [ ] Do not treat a hiring signal as definitive proof of a strategic bet — hiring signals require corroboration from product, messaging, or pricing signals before acting on them
+- [ ] Do not conflate a competitor's announcement with a competitor's shipped capability — press releases and blog posts often describe aspirations, not production features
+- [ ] Do not recommend "accelerate existing initiative" for every High signal — sometimes the right response is to differentiate harder in an adjacent area rather than race the competitor directly
+
+## Quality Checks
+
+- [ ] Every signal is categorised (not just described)
+- [ ] Threat level is justified — not assigned arbitrarily
+- [ ] High-threat signals have specific recommended responses (not "monitor")
+- [ ] Implications connect to specific roadmap items or strategic bets
+- [ ] Strategic summary gives a landscape-level view, not just a list of individual signals