competitive-landscape

Comprehensive frameworks for analyzing competition, identifying differentiation opportunities, and developing winning market positioning strategies.

Quality

44%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/competitive-landscape/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is competitive-landscape in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

Quality

Content

36%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 skill body is a generic template with no domain-specific content: instructions are abstract, the workflow has no concrete sequence or validation, and the only detailed reference points to a file that is missing. It is concise but largely content-free.

Suggestions

Replace the generic instruction bullets with concrete competitive-analysis steps, e.g. identifying competitors, profiling them, building a positioning matrix, and drafting differentiation recommendations.

Add an explicit validation/checkpoint step in the workflow (e.g. cross-check claims against sources, confirm differentiation is defensible before recommending).

Either create the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' with real patterns and examples, or remove the broken reference and inline the key guidance.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows, though the generic 'Use/Do not use' boilerplate is mild padding; it is efficient overall with only minor instances that could be tightened.	4 / 5
Actionability	The instructions are entirely abstract ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs', 'Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') with no concrete code, commands, frameworks, or specific guidance, matching the anchor for vague description rather than executable instruction.	1 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The bullets imply a rough sequence but are highly generic with no defined steps, validation checkpoints, or feedback loops, matching the 'rough sequence present but many gaps; validation absent' anchor.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Structure is clean with a one-level-deep Resources reference, but the referenced file 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' does not exist, breaking the navigation and pulling it down from a higher score.	3 / 5
	Total	10 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 on-topic and clearly scoped to competitive landscape analysis with reasonable distinctiveness, but it lacks a 'Use when...' trigger clause and relies on abstract strategy verbs rather than concrete actions or natural user phrasings. Completeness and trigger quality are the main limitations.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause naming natural trigger phrases such as 'competitive analysis', 'competitor analysis', or 'benchmarking competitors'.

Replace abstract verbs with concrete deliverables, e.g. 'Build competitor profiles, map positioning matrices, and draft differentiation recommendations'.

Include common synonyms and any relevant artifact types (e.g. battle cards, SWOT) to improve trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the competitive-analysis domain and several actions ('analyzing competition, identifying differentiation opportunities, ... developing winning market positioning strategies'), but the actions are high-level strategy verbs rather than concrete operations, fitting the anchor that lists 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage.	3 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear 'what' but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, and the rubric explicitly caps completeness at 3 when such a clause is missing.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant domain terms ('analyzing competition', 'differentiation opportunities', 'market positioning strategies') but misses the most natural user phrasings like 'competitive analysis' or 'competitor analysis', matching the anchor for some relevant keywords with missing common variations.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Competitive landscape analysis' is a fairly distinct niche with domain-specific triggers, with only minor overlap risk against general strategy or market-research skills, matching the 'mostly distinct' anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/competitive-landscape/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 2 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.