competitor-alternatives
When the user wants to create competitor comparison or alternative pages for SEO and sales enablement. Also use when the user mentions 'alternative page,' 'vs page,' 'competitor comparison,' 'comparison page,' '[Product] vs [Product],' '[Product] alternative,' or 'competitive landing pages.' Covers four formats: singular alternative, plural alternatives, you vs competitor, and competitor vs competitor. Emphasizes deep research, modular content architecture, and varied section types beyond feature tables.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill competitor-alternativesOverall
score
78%
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
90%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description with excellent trigger term coverage and completeness. The explicit 'Use when' clause with multiple natural language variations ensures reliable skill selection. The main weakness is that the capabilities could be more concrete - listing specific deliverables or actions rather than abstract concepts like 'modular content architecture.'
Suggestions
Replace abstract phrases like 'modular content architecture' and 'varied section types' with concrete actions such as 'create feature comparison tables, write positioning statements, generate pricing comparisons'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (competitor comparison/alternative pages) and mentions some actions like 'deep research, modular content architecture, and varied section types,' but doesn't list concrete specific actions like 'write comparison tables, generate feature matrices, create pricing comparisons.' | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (create competitor comparison/alternative pages for SEO and sales enablement, covering four formats) AND when (explicit 'Use when' clause with specific trigger phrases and scenarios). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'alternative page,' 'vs page,' 'competitor comparison,' 'comparison page,' '[Product] vs [Product],' '[Product] alternative,' 'competitive landing pages' - these match real user language patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Very clear niche with distinct triggers - the specific mention of 'vs page,' 'alternative page,' and the four format types (singular alternative, plural alternatives, you vs competitor, competitor vs competitor) makes this highly distinguishable from general content or SEO skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a comprehensive and highly actionable skill for creating competitor comparison pages, with excellent concrete templates and data structures. However, it suffers from verbosity (explaining obvious principles), lacks explicit workflow sequencing with validation steps, and would benefit from being split into multiple files for better progressive disclosure. The actionable templates are the strongest element.
Suggestions
Remove or significantly condense the 'Core Principles' section—these are obvious guidelines that don't add actionable value for Claude
Add an explicit numbered workflow at the top showing the sequence: 1) Research competitor → 2) Create data file → 3) Validate data completeness → 4) Generate page → 5) Review for accuracy → 6) Publish
Split into multiple files: keep SKILL.md as overview with quick-start, move templates to TEMPLATES.md, competitor data schema to SCHEMA.md, and research process to RESEARCH.md
Add validation checkpoints such as 'Before publishing, verify: pricing is current, feature claims are accurate, competitor quotes are sourced'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is comprehensive but verbose in places—explanations of core principles and research processes include content Claude would already understand. Some sections like 'Core Principles' explain obvious concepts (honesty builds trust, help them decide) that don't add actionable value. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides highly concrete, copy-paste ready templates including YAML data structures, markdown page structures, comparison table formats, and specific URL patterns. The section templates are immediately usable with clear placeholders. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While the page formats and structures are clear, the overall workflow for creating competitor pages lacks explicit sequencing and validation checkpoints. The research process section lists what to gather but doesn't provide a clear step-by-step workflow with verification points before publishing. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a monolithic document (~600 lines) that could benefit from splitting into separate files (e.g., templates.md, research-process.md, competitor-data-schema.md). The 'Related Skills' section at the end suggests connections but the main content is all inline rather than appropriately distributed. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 13 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (751 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
Total | 13 / 16 Passed | |
- 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.