CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

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.

46

Quality

49%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/competitor-alternatives/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%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 follows good progressive-disclosure practice — a lean overview delegating to a real one-level reference — but the body itself is thin: it duplicates the description, offers a tautological 'When to Use', and provides no concrete or sequenced guidance beyond 'read the guide'.

Suggestions

Remove the verbatim description paragraph from the body (it already lives in frontmatter) and replace the tautological 'When to Use' with concrete trigger conditions.

Add a brief, concrete quick-start or 2–3 step summary in the body so the skill is actionable without forcing a full reference load for simple cases.

Surface one or two key validation/safety checkpoints inline so the workflow has explicit checkpoints rather than purely implicit delegation.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is short and respects the token budget, but it duplicates the frontmatter description verbatim and includes a tautological 'When to Use' ("applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview") that could be trimmed.

3 / 5

Actionability

The body offers only minimal concrete guidance — "Read [the detailed guide]" — with no code, commands, or specific steps in the body itself; all executable detail is deferred to the reference.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The body presents a single delegation step (read the guide, then execute) with no articulated sequence or validation checkpoints in the body; the actual workflow lives entirely in the reference, leaving clarity implicit.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a clear overview pointing to one well-signaled, one-level-deep reference (references/detailed-guide.md, which exists and contains no nested skill-bundle references), with content appropriately split for focused or end-to-end loading.

5 / 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 identifies a distinct niche and a clear "what", but it lacks any explicit "when to use" trigger guidance and relies on goal-level rather than concrete actions, while using second-person voice that further lowers specificity. It is adequate but not exemplary.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when…' trigger clause naming concrete situations (e.g., 'Use when creating comparison pages for [Your Product] vs competitors, or 'alternatives to [Competitor]' pages').

Rewrite in third person ('Creates competitor comparison and alternative pages…') to satisfy the voice requirement and recover the specificity penalty.

Replace goal-level phrasing with concrete actions (e.g., 'researches competitors, drafts comparison tables, structures alternative-to pages for SEO') to lift specificity above 3.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain but its actions are goal-level and generic ("build pages that rank", "provide genuine value", "position your product effectively") rather than concrete operations; the second-person voice ("You are", "Your goal") triggers the −1 specificity penalty from a baseline of 3.

2 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear (build competitor comparison/alternative pages), but there is no "Use when…" clause or equivalent trigger guidance, so completeness is capped at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant natural terms ("competitor comparison", "alternative pages", "competitive search terms") but misses common variations and synonyms a user would say (e.g., "vs page", "alternatives to X", "comparison page").

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Competitor comparison and alternative pages" is a clear, fairly distinct SEO/content niche with minor overlap risk against general content-marketing skills; it is unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
Reviewed

Table of Contents

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.