/competitive

description: Research competitors - who else does this, how, strengths/weaknesses
argument-hint: [product/feature or leave blank for current context]

<objective> Research competitive landscape for $ARGUMENTS (or the current topic if no arguments provided).

Understand who else solves this problem, how they do it, and where the opportunities are. </objective>

<intake_gate>

<context_analysis> First, analyze $ARGUMENTS to extract what's already provided:

• The product/feature space
• Known competitors
• Dimensions that matter (features, pricing, UX)
• What you're trying to learn

Only ask about genuine gaps - don't re-ask what's already stated. </context_analysis>

<initial_questions> Use AskUserQuestion to ask 2-4 questions based on actual gaps:

**If competitors unclear:**

• "Any specific competitors to include?" with options: I have a list, Find the main ones, Direct competitors only, Include indirect competitors, Other

**If dimensions unclear:**

• "What dimensions matter?" with options: Features/capabilities, Pricing/business model, UX/design, Technical approach, All of the above, Other

**If goal unclear:**

• "What are you trying to learn?" with options: How to differentiate, Market positioning, Feature gaps, Technical approaches, Other

**If depth unclear:**

• "How many competitors?" with options: Top 3, Top 5, Comprehensive (7+), Other

Skip questions where $ARGUMENTS already provides the answer. </initial_questions>

<decision_gate> After receiving answers, use AskUserQuestion:

Question: "Ready to research competitors, or would you like me to ask more questions?"

Options: 1. **Start research** - I have enough context 2. **Ask more questions** - There are details to clarify 3. **Let me add context** - I want to provide additional information

If "Ask more questions" → generate 2-3 contextual follow-ups, then present decision gate again If "Let me add context" → receive input, then present decision gate again If "Start research" → proceed to research </decision_gate>

</intake_gate>

<process> After intake complete:

1. Define what problem/space we're competing in 2. Identify 3-5 key competitors (direct and indirect) 3. For each competitor, analyze:

• How they solve the problem
• Target audience
• Strengths and weaknesses
• Pricing/business model

4. Identify patterns across competitors 5. Find gaps and opportunities </process>

<output_format>

Competitive Research: [Space/Problem]

Strategic Summary

[2-3 sentences: the competitive landscape, key insight, main opportunity]

Problem Being Solved

[What job are all these products doing for users]

Competitors

**[Competitor 1]**

• **Solution:** [How they solve it]
• **Target:** [Who they serve]
• **Strengths:** [What they do well]
• **Weaknesses:** [Where they fall short]
• **Pricing:** [Model and range]

**[Competitor 2]** [Same structure...]

**[Competitor 3]** [Same structure...]

Comparison Matrix

| Aspect | Comp 1 | Comp 2 | Comp 3 | |--------|--------|--------|--------| | [Key feature] | Y/N | Y/N | Y/N | | [Key feature] | Y/N | Y/N | Y/N | | [Key feature] | Y/N | Y/N | Y/N |

Patterns

[What most/all competitors do - table stakes]

Gaps & Opportunities

• [Gap]: [Why it's underserved, opportunity]
• [Gap]: [Why it's underserved, opportunity]

Differentiation Options

1. [Way to differentiate]: [tradeoff] 2. [Way to differentiate]: [tradeoff]

Implementation Context

<claude_context> <insights>

• table_stakes: [features we must have to compete]
• differentiators: [features that would set us apart]
• avoid: [approaches that don't work in this space]

</insights> <technical>

• common_patterns: [technical approaches competitors use]
• opportunities: [technical approaches no one uses yet]
• integrations: [common integrations in this space]

</technical> <positioning>

• underserved: [user segments not well served]
• overserved: [segments with too many options]

</positioning> </claude_context>

**Next Action:** Deep dive on specific competitor, validate gaps with user research, or run /plan/brief to define our approach

Sources

• [Source name]: [URL] - [date accessed]
• [Source name]: [URL] - [date accessed]

</output_format>

<artifact_output> Save the research to a file:

1. Create directory structure if it doesn't exist:

• `[current-working-directory]/artifacts/research/`

2. Generate filename from topic:

• Get current date in YYYY-MM-DD format
• Slugify the topic (lowercase, hyphens for spaces)
• Format: `YYYY-MM-DD-[topic]-competitive.md`
• Example: `2025-01-15-midi-sequencers-competitive.md`

3. Write the complete research to the file

4. Report to user: "Saved to `artifacts/research/[filename]`" </artifact_output>

<success_criteria>

• Competitors are genuinely relevant (not just big names)
• Analysis is honest (not dismissive of competition)
• Gaps are real opportunities (not just missing features)
• Differentiation options are actionable
• Implementation context identifies technical patterns to adopt or avoid
• Informs strategic decisions
• Output saved to artifacts/research/ directory

</success_criteria>