/competitive-research

name: competitive-research
description: Produce a sourced competitive matrix for a focused research question
argument-hint: "[research topic or path to a research-prompt file]"

Competitive Research

You help produce a sourced competitive matrix for a focused research question. The output is a markdown table plus sourced observations, landed in `research/`.

Input

The user provides via `$ARGUMENTS`:

• A short research topic (e.g., "how competitors handle first-time user onboarding"), OR
• A path to a research-prompt file (e.g., `samples/sample-competitor-prompt.md`)

Workflow

1. Read the prompt

If `$ARGUMENTS` is a file path, read it. Otherwise use the prompt directly.

**Extract (or ask in one round)**:

• **Research topic** - the question.
• **Scope** - which competitors (direct / adjacent / aspirational), any exclusions.
• **Questions** - 3-7 specific things you want answered.
• **Deliverable format** - matrix (rows = products, columns = questions) by default.
• **Timeline and non-goals**.

If any of these are missing, ask the user in ONE `AskUserQuestion` round. Skip any that are clear.

2. Pick the competitor set

If the user provided competitors, use them. Otherwise suggest a set and confirm:

• **Direct**: 2-3 products in the same pricing tier and feature surface as your own (list your company's known competitors from `CLAUDE.md` or ask).
• **Adjacent / aspirational**: 1-2 products in related spaces known for excellent practice in the research topic.
• **Exclude**: tools clearly out of scope.

Confirm the list with the user before proceeding.

3. Gather observations (sourced)

For each product, for each research question, gather observations. Use available tools:

• **WebFetch / WebSearch** for public product docs, blog posts, marketing pages, changelog posts, and product-hunt-style coverage.
• **Any documentation MCP** your environment has configured (check the `MCP Servers Available` section of `CLAUDE.md`).
• **Internal research notes** in `Loose Notes/Work/` that mention the competitor by name.

**Rules for observations**:

• **Sourced**: every observation has a URL or an internal note reference. No "I think they probably...".
• **Observed vs. inferred**: mark each cell as `observed:` (you can point to a specific page/screenshot) or `inferred:` (your reasoning based on other evidence).
• **Date-stamped**: competitive landscapes move fast. Note the date of the source when it's older than 6 months.

4. Build the matrix

Produce a markdown table:

| Product | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | ... | |---------|----|----|----|-----| | Competitor A | observed: [fact] - [link] | inferred: [reasoning] | ... | ... | | Competitor B | ... | ... | ... | ... |

Cells can be long. Keep them scannable but informative.

5. Summarize the landscape

Below the matrix, write a 3-5 paragraph synthesis:

• **Common patterns**: what do all / most of the competitors do similarly?
• **Divergences**: where do they differ meaningfully, and why?
• **Outliers**: any surprising approaches worth investigating further.
• **Implications for us**: how this should inform our decision (without prescribing a specific solution yet).

6. Note methodology and limits

A short section at the end:

• **Sources consulted**: docs, blog posts, pricing pages, external analyses.
• **Gaps**: what you couldn't find out (and would need a customer conversation or a demo account to verify).
• **Confidence**: where you're confident in observations vs. where you're inferring.

7. File location and naming

• **Folder**: `research/`. Create if it doesn't exist.
• **Filename**: `YYYY-MM-DD - Competitive - [Topic slug].md`. Example: `2026-04-20 - Competitive - Onboarding UX.md`.
• **Frontmatter**: `tags: Research, Competitive`, `created: YYYY-MM-DD`.

8. Link the research

• **Daily journal**: under `## Notes`.
• **Related epic** (if any): add a link in that epic's `## Breakdown > Explore` section.

9. Output summary

✅ Research: [[YYYY-MM-DD - Competitive - Topic]]
✅ Linked in today's journal

Products compared: [N]
Questions answered: [N]
Sources cited: [N]
Gaps flagged: [N]

💡 Key pattern: [One-line top insight]

Next step: run `/opportunity-solution-tree` to convert insights into opportunities.

Notes

• **Sourced over speculative.** If you can't find evidence, say so.
• **A matrix is a structure, not a verdict.** Don't prescribe "we should do X because Competitor Y does it."
• **Competitive research ages fast.** Add the source date for anything older than 6 months. A year-old blog post about a product's onboarding is probably wrong now.
• **The Extended Opportunity Solution Tree framework** pairs well with this - use `/opportunity-solution-tree` next to turn patterns into opportunity hypotheses.