competitor-analysis

Analyze competitor SEO/GEO: keywords, content, backlinks, AI citations, traffic share gaps. 竞品分析/竞争对手

Quality

68%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.cursor/skills/competitor-analysis/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is a well-organized research skill with a clear multi-step workflow, explicit validation checkpoints, and excellent progressive disclosure to four real reference files. Its main weakness is moderate verbosity from filler sentences and generic tips that could be trimmed.

Suggestions

Remove the stray filler sentence under "When This Must Trigger" ("Use this whenever the task needs reusable market intelligence...") and tighten the generic "Tips for Success" list to improve conciseness.

Add a brief error-recovery feedback loop (e.g., what to do when competitor data is missing or validation fails) to push workflow clarity toward 5.

Convert the per-step "document/analyze" guidance into slightly more concrete procedures or point directly to the matching template section per step to strengthen actionability.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and well-structured, but contains padded sections — a stray filler sentence under "When This Must Trigger" and generic "Tips for Success" advice like "Monitor regularly" — that could be trimmed without loss.	3 / 5
Actionability	It gives concrete 8-step instructions specifying exactly what to collect per step, quick-start prompts, and validation checklists; guidance is actionable though it describes what to document rather than providing executable procedures, leaving minor gaps.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 8-step sequence is paired with an explicit Validation Checkpoints section (input and output checklists) and a save-results handoff; it stops short of error-recovery feedback loops, so it sits at clear-sequence-with-most-checkpoints rather than 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a concise overview pointing to four real one-level-deep reference files (analysis-templates, battlecard-template, positioning-frameworks, example-report), each clearly signaled with descriptions and linked inline at the relevant steps, matching the well-structured clear-overview anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

66%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is specific and multi-lingual with good trigger keywords, but it omits an explicit "Use when..." clause within the description field itself, relying on a separate when_to_use field for trigger guidance. Adding the trigger clause inline would raise completeness.

Suggestions

Append an explicit "Use when..." clause to the description string (e.g., "Use when analyzing competitor SEO strategy, comparing domains, or finding keyword/content gaps") so the description alone conveys both what and when.

Expand the action list slightly toward comprehensive coverage (e.g., mention technical/site-health assessment or SERP features) to push specificity toward 5.

Add a couple of natural-language user phrasings (e.g., "why do competitors rank higher", "SpyFu alternative") to the description to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists several concrete actions — "keywords, content, backlinks, AI citations, traffic share gaps" — naming the domain and multiple specific tasks, but is compressed rather than fully comprehensive, fitting the score-4 anchor with minor gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	The description string states a clear "what" but contains no explicit "Use when..." trigger clause; the when-guidance lives in a separate when_to_use field, so per the rubric a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It covers good natural keywords ("competitor SEO", "GEO", "keywords", "backlinks", "AI citations") plus multilingual synonyms ("竞品分析/竞争对手"), but a few common natural phrasings are absent, placing it just below comprehensive.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"competitor SEO/GEO" is a clear niche with distinct triggers and low conflict risk, with only minor overlap against the sibling content-gap-analysis skill, matching the mostly-distinct score-4 anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_field	'metadata' should map string keys to string values	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: MODSetter/SurfSense
Path: .cursor/skills/competitor-analysis/SKILL.md
Commit: be4a191

Reviewed: 15 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.