Add multi-platform export generator (single source of truth)

Make the library multi-platform without duplicating content. Each skills/<name>/SKILL.md body remains the single source of truth; a new generator renders platform-ready exports from it. - scripts/build-exports.mjs — dependency-free Node generator with a PLATFORMS registry so new platforms (Gemini, Cursor, …) are a few lines. Ships ChatGPT exports at exports/chatgpt/<bundle>/<skill>/SYSTEM_PROMPT.md (172 skills), plus generated index READMEs. Supports --platform and --check. - exports/ — generated ChatGPT system prompts, ready to paste into a Custom GPT. - .github/workflows/check-generated.yml — fails a PR if exports or web/skills.json drift from the source skills. - README "Works With" now documents the ready-to-use exports and regen command. - CHANGELOG + SKILL-AUTHORING-STANDARD note the generated artifacts. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016JWn5jRD5tcEFKrubjQ6Px
2026-06-17 08:01:20 +00:00
parent 760f979365
commit 572b8acf8c
179 changed files with 29887 additions and 1 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+# Competitive Analysis Skill
+
+Create structured competitive analyses for product decision-making.
+
+## Required Inputs
+
+Ask the user for these if not provided:
+- **Your product or company** (what you're comparing against)
+- **Competitors to analyze** (or ask to identify the top 3-5)
+- **Analysis focus** (full landscape / feature comparison / pricing / positioning / win-loss)
+- **Audience** (product team / leadership / sales / board)
+
+## Process
+
+1. Gather competitor information from provided inputs and available context
+2. Build profiles for each competitor
+3. Create feature comparison matrix on dimensions that matter to the user's customers
+4. Analyze pricing and positioning
+5. Identify win/loss patterns and strategic implications
+6. **Validate** — Confirm all claims reference a specific source or are flagged as assumptions. Verify feature comparisons note quality differences, not just presence/absence.
+
+## Output Structure
+
+### 1. Executive Summary
+- **Market Position**: Where we stand relative to competitors
+- **Key Findings**: Top 3-5 insights
+- **Strategic Implications**: What this means for the roadmap
+
+### 2. Competitor Profiles
+
+For each competitor:
+- **Company Overview**: Size, funding, market position
+- **Target Customer**: Who they serve
+- **Value Proposition**: Core positioning
+- **Strengths / Weaknesses**: What they do well and where they fall short
+- **Recent Activity**: Major updates, funding, announcements
+
+### 3. Feature Comparison Matrix
+
+| Feature | Us | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
+|---------|-----|--------------|--------------|--------------|
+| [Feature] | ✅ Full | ⚠️ Limited | ❌ None | ✅ Full |
+
+Legend: ✅ Full (production-ready) · ⚠️ Limited/Beta · ❌ None
+
+Include notes on quality and implementation differences where significant.
+
+### 4. Pricing Comparison
+
+| Plan | Us | Competitor A | Competitor B |
+|------|-----|--------------|--------------|
+| Free/Trial | [price] | [price] | [price] |
+| Pro | [price] | [price] | [price] |
+| Enterprise | [price] | [price] | [price] |
+
+### 5. Market Positioning Map
+
+Position competitors on two key dimensions relevant to the market:
+- Y-Axis: [e.g., Enterprise vs. SMB]
+- X-Axis: [e.g., Simple vs. Comprehensive]
+
+**Whitespace Opportunities**: [Underserved segments]
+
+### 6. Win/Loss Analysis
+
+**Why We Win:**
+- Better at: [specific capabilities]
+- Customers who value: [what matters to them]
+
+**Why We Lose:**
+- When customers need: [specific requirements]
+- Their advantage: [what tips the decision]
+
+### 7. Strategic Recommendations
+
+**Immediate Actions (0-3 months):**
+1. [Action] — [Rationale]
+
+**Medium-term (3-12 months):**
+1. [Action] — [Rationale]
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not present competitor feature claims as facts without citing a source or flagging them as assumptions — outdated or incorrect feature data misleads sales and product decisions
+- [ ] Do not build a competitive analysis that only covers features — pricing, messaging, go-to-market motion, and who they hire for are equally strategic signals
+- [ ] Do not treat all buyers as identical — the same product may win against Competitor A in the enterprise segment and lose in SMB; segment-specific win/loss matters
+- [ ] Do not soften weaknesses and threats in the SWOT to avoid internal discomfort — an honest SWOT is only useful if the negatives are real
+
+## Quality Checks
+
+- [ ] All competitor claims cite a source or are flagged as assumptions
+- [ ] Feature comparison notes quality differences, not just feature presence
+- [ ] Strategic recommendations are specific actions, not generic advice
+- [ ] Win/loss analysis reflects customer perspective, not internal assumptions
+- [ ] Different customer segments are considered (not all buyers value the same things)