competitor-alternatives

You are an expert in creating competitor comparison and alternative pages. Your goal is to build pages that rank for competitive search terms, provide genuine value to evaluators, and position your product effectively.

Quality

53%

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/competitor-alternatives/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is competitor-alternatives in sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Quality

Content

57%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 body is a comprehensive, well-sectioned, and actionable instruction skill with strong templates, but it is a long monolith with no external references, some padded principle sections, and no verification checkpoints for batch page generation.

Suggestions

Move the competitor-data YAML schema and the reusable section/comparison-table templates into reference files (e.g. references/competitor-data.yaml, references/section-templates.md) and link to them from SKILL.md.

Add explicit validation/verification steps to the workflow, such as fact-checking competitor claims against current pricing pages before publishing.

Trim the 'Core Principles' and 'Initial Assessment' sections to the non-obvious essentials and drop the opening paragraph that duplicates the frontmatter description.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Mostly efficient with concrete templates, but padded in places — the 'Core Principles' section states self-evident guidance like 'Acknowledge competitor strengths', and the opening paragraph repeats the frontmatter description — fitting anchor 3.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete, copy-paste-ready templates (URL patterns, numbered page structures, a YAML competitor-data schema, comparison-table formats, FAQ schema JSON); the final 'Output Format' section is placeholder-heavy with minor gaps, matching anchor 4.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear sequence exists (research -> centralized data -> page generation -> ongoing updates), but there are no validation/verification checkpoints for what is effectively batch page generation, capping workflow clarity at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clear sections, but it is a ~750-line monolith with no bundle files or references; content that could be split out (competitor YAML schema, section templates, FAQ schema) is inlined, matching anchor 3.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

48%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 clearly states what the skill does and occupies a distinct niche, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when' trigger, uses second-person voice, and omits common search-intent synonyms users would naturally say.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when creating competitor comparison, alternative, or vs. pages for SEO.'

Switch to third person and include natural synonyms users say, such as 'vs [competitor]', '[competitor] alternatives', and 'compare to [competitor]'.

Tighten to a single concise sentence covering what and when rather than the current goal-statement framing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and 2-3 concrete actions ('build pages that rank for competitive search terms', 'position your product effectively') matching anchor 3, but the second-person voice ('Your goal is to build', 'your product') triggers a one-point specificity penalty per the rubric guidelines.	2 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clear (create competitor comparison/alternative pages), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant terms like 'competitor comparison' and 'alternative pages' are present but common variations users actually say ('vs page', 'compare to [competitor]', '[X] alternatives') are missing, fitting anchor 3.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Targets a specific niche (competitor comparison/alternative SEO pages) with distinct triggers and only minor overlap risk with generic SEO or copywriting skills, matching anchor 4.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 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
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (757 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/competitor-alternatives/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.