Files

T

mohitagw15856 036511ab3e 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>

2026-06-17 23:15:38 +01:00

3.5 KiB

Raw Blame History

trigger, description

trigger	description
model_decision	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.

trigger

description

model_decision

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

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

3.5 KiB Raw Blame History