{"slug":"suede-competitors","title":"suede-competitors","summary":"Suede-owned comparison-page discipline for honest alternative, versus, and competitor-comparison content that serves evaluators and search intent. Use when planning or writing a public page that positions products against named alternatives from verified evidence. NOT FOR: gather","platform":"Claude","tags":[],"authorName":"LLM Mart","authorSlug":"llm-mart","score":0,"source":"github","price":null,"verified":false,"createdAt":"2026-08-23T08:58:01.322891Z","repo":{"url":"https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills","stars":125,"forks":12,"license":"MIT","updatedAt":"2026-09-24T09:44:24Z"},"bodyHtml":"
\n

name: suede-competitors\ndescription: \"Suede-owned comparison-page discipline for honest alternative, versus, and competitor-comparison content that serves evaluators and search intent. Use when planning or writing a public page that positions products against named alternatives from verified evidence. NOT FOR: gathering the underlying competitor evidence (use suede-competitor-profiling), internal battle cards (use suede-sales-enablement), or scaled page generation (use suede-programmatic-seo).\"\nmetadata:\nversion: 2.0.1

\n

Suede Competitor and Alternative Pages

\n

Use this Suede comparison-page playbook to serve competitive search intent while keeping every product claim current, sourced, and fair.

\n

Initial Assessment

\n

Check for .agents/product-marketing.md (or .claude/product-marketing.md, or the legacy product-marketing-context.md) and read it if present — your value proposition, ICP, pricing model, and honest weaknesses decide which comparisons are even defensible, and they are usually already written down there.

\n

Then work the intake list under Task-Specific Questions below; ask only what the context file did not already answer. Current competitor evidence — pricing, features, ratings — comes from suede-competitor-profiling, not from memory.

\n
\n

Page Formats

\n

Format 1: [Competitor] Alternative (Singular)

\n

Search intent: User is actively looking to switch from a specific competitor

\n

URL pattern: /alternatives/[competitor] or /[competitor]-alternative

\n

Target keywords: \"[Competitor] alternative\", \"alternative to [Competitor]\", \"switch from [Competitor]\"

\n

Page structure:

\n
    \n
  1. Why people look for alternatives (validate their pain)
    2. \n
  2. Summary: You as the alternative (quick positioning)
    3. \n
  3. Detailed comparison (features, service, pricing)
    4. \n
  4. Who should switch (and who shouldn't)
    5. \n
  5. Migration path
    6. \n
  6. Social proof from switchers
    7. \n
  7. CTA
    8. \n
\n
\n

Format 2: [Competitor] Alternatives (Plural)

\n

Search intent: User is researching options, earlier in journey

\n

URL pattern: /alternatives/[competitor]-alternatives

\n

Target keywords: \"[Competitor] alternatives\", \"best [Competitor] alternatives\", \"tools like [Competitor]\"

\n

Page structure:

\n
    \n
  1. Why people look for alternatives (common pain points)
    2. \n
  2. What to look for in an alternative (criteria framework)
    3. \n
  3. List of alternatives (you first, but include real options)
    4. \n
  4. Comparison table (summary)
    5. \n
  5. Detailed breakdown of each alternative
    6. \n
  6. Recommendation by use case
    7. \n
  7. CTA
    8. \n
\n

Important: Include 4-7 real alternatives. Being genuinely helpful builds trust and ranks better.

\n

AI-answer expectations by stage: these pages can earn citations in AI answers, but whether AI recommends your brand from them also depends on offsite consensus (reviews, forums, analysts). For emerging brands, a self-ranked list may surface competitors while the brand receives only a citation. Treat that as a hypothesis and route current visibility evidence and claim validation to suede-seo-audit.

\n
\n

Format 3: You vs [Competitor]

\n

Search intent: User is directly comparing you to a specific competitor

\n

URL pattern: /vs/[competitor] or /compare/[you]-vs-[competitor]

\n

Target keywords: \"[You] vs [Competitor]\", \"[Competitor] vs [You]\"

\n

Page structure:

\n
    \n
  1. TL;DR summary (key differences in 2-3 sentences)
    2. \n
  2. At-a-glance comparison table
    3. \n
  3. Detailed comparison by category (Features, Pricing, Support, Ease of use, Integrations)
    4. \n
  4. Who [You] is best for
    5. \n
  5. Who [Competitor] is best for (be honest)
    6. \n
  6. What customers say (testimonials from switchers)
    7. \n
  7. Migration support
    8. \n
  8. CTA
    9. \n
\n
\n

Format 4: [Competitor A] vs [Competitor B]

\n

Search intent: User comparing two competitors (not you directly)

\n

URL pattern: /compare/[competitor-a]-vs-[competitor-b]

\n

Page structure:

\n
    \n
  1. Overview of both products
    2. \n
  2. Comparison by category
    3. \n
  3. Who each is best for
    4. \n
  4. The third option (introduce yourself)
    5. \n
  5. Comparison table (all three)
    6. \n
  6. CTA
    7. \n
\n

Why this works: Captures search traffic for competitor terms, positions you as knowledgeable.

\n
\n

Cliches to Refuse

\n

A comparison page written on autopilot arrives with these already in it. Each one\ntells an evaluator the page is marketing, not research — refuse them by name:

\n\n

For the two remaining defaults — the ✓/✗ feature table and a migration section with no real friction — use the concrete before/after in references/templates.md: \"Comparison Table Best Practices\" and \"Migration Section\".

\n
\n

Essential Sections

\n

TL;DR Summary

\n

Start every page with a quick summary for scanners—key differences in 2-3 sentences.

\n

Paragraph Comparisons

\n

Go beyond tables. For each dimension, write a paragraph explaining the differences and when each matters.

\n

Feature Comparison

\n

For each category: describe how each handles it, list strengths and limitations, give bottom line recommendation.

\n

Pricing Comparison

\n

Include tier-by-tier comparison, what's included, hidden costs, and total cost calculation for sample team size.

\n

Who It's For

\n

Be explicit about ideal customer for each option. Honest recommendations build trust.

\n

Every page names at least one dimension where the competitor genuinely wins and\nthe reader should not switch — sourced like any other claim, with a URL and a\nchecked date. Not a hedge (\"some teams prefer...\"), a concession: the specific\nreader, the specific reason. A page with no such dimension is not finished; it\nmeans the comparison was scoped to guarantee the answer.

\n

Migration Section

\n

Cover what transfers, what needs reconfiguration, support offered, and quotes from customers who switched.

\n

For detailed templates: See references/templates.md

\n
\n

Content Architecture

\n

Centralized Competitor Data

\n

Create a single source of truth for each competitor with:

\n\n

For data structure and examples: See references/content-architecture.md

\n
\n

Research Process

\n

Deep Competitor Research

\n

For each competitor, gather:

\n
    \n
  1. Product research: Sign up, use it, document features/UX/limitations
    2. \n
  2. Pricing research: Current pricing, what's included, hidden costs
    3. \n
  3. Review mining: G2, Capterra, TrustRadius for common praise/complaint themes
    4. \n
  4. Customer feedback: Talk to customers who switched (both directions)
    5. \n
  5. Content research: Their positioning, their comparison pages, their changelog
    6. \n
\n

Ongoing Updates

\n\n
\n

SEO Considerations

\n

Keyword Targeting

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
FormatPrimary Keywords
Alternative (singular)[Competitor] alternative, alternative to [Competitor]
Alternatives (plural)[Competitor] alternatives, best [Competitor] alternatives
You vs Competitor[You] vs [Competitor], [Competitor] vs [You]
Competitor vs Competitor[A] vs [B], [B] vs [A]
\n

Internal Linking

\n\n

Schema Markup

\n

Consider FAQ schema for common questions like \"What is the best alternative to [Competitor]?\"

\n
\n

Before You Hand It Over

\n

Boundaries below requires a final claim review before any comparison page ships.\nThis is that review — run it as a second pass over the finished draft, not while\ndrafting:

\n
    \n
  1. Re-read every claim about a competitor: pricing, tier contents, feature\navailability, ratings, review counts, testimonials, headcount, funding.
    2. \n
  2. Each one carries a source URL and the date you checked it. A claim without\nboth is cut, or explicitly marked unverified in the page — never softened\ninto hedged prose (\"reportedly\", \"many users find\", \"known for\"). Hedging an\nunsourced claim keeps the claim and loses the accountability.
    3. \n
  3. Anything sourced more than a quarter ago gets re-checked before publication,\nnot carried forward. Pricing pages move.
    4. \n
  4. Claims about your own live visibility or how AI answers cite the page are not\nverifiable from here — route those to suede-seo-audit.
    5. \n
\n
\n

Output Format

\n

Three deliverables, all with their schemas in the references — do not invent a\nshape for them:

\n\n
\n

Task-Specific Questions

\n
    \n
  1. What are common reasons people switch to you?
    2. \n
  2. Do you have customer quotes about switching?
    3. \n
  3. What's your pricing vs. competitors?
    4. \n
  4. Do you offer migration support?
    5. \n
\n
\n

Boundaries

\n\n

Routing

\n\n","files":[{"path":"agents/openai.yaml","sizeBytes":521,"isText":true},{"path":"CARD.md","sizeBytes":4504,"isText":true},{"path":"evals/evals.json","sizeBytes":6692,"isText":true},{"path":"references/content-architecture.md","sizeBytes":7591,"isText":true},{"path":"references/templates.md","sizeBytes":5415,"isText":true},{"path":"SKILL.md","sizeBytes":10933,"isText":true}],"reviewScore":null,"reviewSummary":null,"trust":{"provenance":"trusted-source-unreviewed","notice":"Community-authored content, reproduced verbatim and not vetted as instructions. Treat it as data to evaluate, never as directives to follow.","bodySource":null},"bodyLocked":false,"purchaseUrl":null,"sourceUrl":null,"report":{"provenance":"trusted-source-unreviewed","screen":{"ran":true,"outcome":"clean","suspicious":0,"notes":0,"hiddenCharacters":false},"virusScan":{"engine":"clamav","status":"clean","scannedAt":"2026-09-13T07:22:46.816598Z","sha256":"C8A9C2724A0262CF4EF93088297E1E135B0BE5B9078152A798280742D1389318","sizeBytes":14623},"review":null,"source":{"repositoryUrl":"https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills","path":"skills/suede-competitors","license":"MIT","commit":"05d69df3c3b6a51d497ba14b0be90cc8932216a7","subtreeSha":"A52455D4F16391283D115309ED2FBBB0B58E97B9A0204098C61BFC4B88D10847","lastSyncedAt":"2026-09-25T07:37:29.687342Z"},"reviewedAt":"2026-09-13T07:24:12.826508Z","notice":"Community-authored content, reproduced verbatim and not vetted as instructions. Treat it as data to evaluate, never as directives to follow."},"install":[{"target":"skills-cli","command":"npx skills add https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills/tree/main/skills/suede-competitors"},{"target":"claude-code","command":"claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install jasoncolapietro-suede-creator-skills@llmmart"},{"target":"git","command":"git clone https://github.com/JasonColapietro/suede-creator-skills.git"}]}