Name: competitive-landscape
Rating: 69.6 (1 reviews)
Author: every-app

Blog Docs Log inGet started

competitive-landscape

Map SEO market leaders, winning content themes, keyword coverage, backlinks, and strategic gaps.

Quality

87%

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

The canonical home for this skill is competitive-landscape in every-app/open-seo

Quality

Content

96%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.

An exemplary instruction-only skill: lean, highly actionable, with a well-sequenced workflow containing real validation checkpoints and fallbacks. The only improvement area is progressive disclosure — the body is longer than a pure overview and could offload the tool catalog or output-format details to a reference file.

Suggestions

Move the per-tool MCP descriptions to a references file (e.g. references/tools.md), keeping only the tool names and the decision rule for when each applies in SKILL.md.

Alternatively, split the detailed output-format section into a report template reference and keep a one-line summary in the body.

Trim inline verbosity slightly (e.g. compress the project-context preamble) to bring the body closer to a lean overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Every line is operational — tool selection rules, defaults like 'top 3-5 domains' and 'at most 10 queries per call', exact write-back payloads, and guardrails — with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padding.	5 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, executable guidance throughout: named MCP tools with per-tool use conditions, the exact payload shape '{ appendResearchLog: { summary: ... } }', an exact doc URL, ordered output sections, and explicit fallback paths (e.g. continue with SERP evidence if backlinks fail).	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 9-step workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit checkpoints (research-log check before spending credits, user confirmation of an inferred competitor shortlist), an error-recovery loop for backlink data being unavailable, and a conditional stop before writing HTML if the report skill is missing.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized single-file skill with clear sections and appropriate cross-skill references (seo-report, competitor-analysis), but at ~82 lines the full MCP tool catalog and output-format spec are inlined rather than split into a reference file, so it sits above the clean-5 single-file case.	4 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Description

71%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.

A specific, third-person description with strong capability coverage, but it omits any 'when to use' trigger guidance and lacks common synonyms like 'competitors'. Adding a Use-when clause with natural trigger phrases would raise completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when the user wants a market-level view of SEO competitors, who is winning, or where the gaps are.'

Include natural synonyms users would actually say — 'competitors', 'competitive analysis', 'who is winning' — alongside the current domain terms.

Sharpen distinctiveness from adjacent skills by signaling scope (multiple competitors vs. a single-domain deep dive) in the description itself.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the SEO domain and five concrete deliverables — 'market leaders, winning content themes, keyword coverage, backlinks, and strategic gaps' — giving comprehensive coverage of the competitive-analysis scope with no vague filler.	5 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is explicit (map leaders, themes, keyword coverage, backlinks, gaps) but there is no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger clause, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural phrases like 'SEO market leaders', 'keyword coverage', and 'backlinks' are present, but common user phrasings such as 'competitors', 'competitive analysis', or 'who is winning' are missing, matching 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing'.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The SEO competitive-landscape niche is mostly distinct, but terms like 'keyword coverage' and 'backlinks' create minor overlap risk with keyword-research or link-analysis skills.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: every-app/open-seo
Path: .agents/skills/competitive-landscape/SKILL.md
Commit: db8bde1

Reviewed: 4 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.