Claude
572b8acf8c
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
3.0 KiB
3.0 KiB
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
- For each competitor update provided, categorise the signal type
- Assess: Is this reactive (responding to market) or proactive (setting direction)?
- Rate strategic threat level: High / Medium / Low / Watch
- Connect to your roadmap: does this accelerate, validate, or challenge any of your bets?
- Recommend a response: Accelerate existing initiative / Deprioritise / Monitor / Investigate further
- 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