interface:
  display_name: "Suede Competitor Pages"
  short_description: "Write comparison and alternative pages that rank and convert"
  default_prompt: "Use $suede-competitors on [target]. The user wants a versus page, alternative page, or competitor comparison for search and sales. Work through page formats, claim discipline, and honest framing, ground every recommendation in evidence the user can check, and return the decisions, the reasoning, and what to measure next."
policy:
  allow_implicit_invocation: true

{
  "skill_name": "suede-competitors",
  "evals": [
    {
      "id": 1,
      "prompt": "Create a 'Best Asana Alternatives' page for our project management tool. We compete mainly on price (we're $8/user vs their $24/user) and simplicity (they've become bloated). Target audience is small teams (5-20 people).",
      "expected_output": "Should check for product-marketing.md first. Should identify this as the plural alternatives format ([Competitor] Alternatives). Should include the essential sections: TL;DR comparison, brief paragraphs on each alternative (including the user's product positioned first or prominently), feature comparison table, pricing comparison, who each alternative is best for. Should use the modular content architecture approach. Should address SEO considerations for the target keyword 'Asana alternatives.' Should position the user's product with the stated differentiators (price, simplicity).",
      "assertions": [
        "Checks for product-marketing.md",
        "Identifies as plural alternatives format",
        "Includes TL;DR comparison section",
        "Includes feature comparison table",
        "Includes pricing comparison",
        "Includes 'who it's best for' per alternative",
        "Positions user's product prominently with differentiators",
        "Addresses SEO for target keyword"
      ],
      "files": []
    },
    {
      "id": 2,
      "prompt": "Write a 'HubSpot vs Salesforce' comparison page. We're HubSpot and want to show why we're the better choice for SMBs.",
      "expected_output": "Should identify this as the 'you vs competitor' format. Should include structured comparison sections: overview of both, feature-by-feature comparison, pricing comparison, pros/cons of each, who each is best for, and migration path. Should be factually accurate about the competitor while strategically positioning the user's product. Should include a TL;DR at the top. Should address the SMB angle throughout. Should use the centralized competitor data architecture pattern.",
      "assertions": [
        "Identifies as 'you vs competitor' format",
        "Includes structured comparison sections",
        "Includes feature-by-feature comparison",
        "Includes pricing comparison",
        "Includes TL;DR at the top",
        "Factually accurate about competitor",
        "Strategically positions user's product for SMBs",
        "Includes migration path or switching section"
      ],
      "files": []
    },
    {
      "id": 3,
      "prompt": "we need a page targeting 'mailchimp alternative' (singular). we're an email marketing platform focused on e-commerce brands.",
      "expected_output": "Should trigger on casual phrasing. Should identify this as the singular alternative format ([Competitor] Alternative — positioning your product as THE alternative). Should focus the entire page on why the user's product is the best Mailchimp alternative for e-commerce. Should include: why people switch from Mailchimp, what the user's product does better (e-commerce specific features), feature comparison, pricing comparison, migration guide, customer testimonials. Should optimize for the singular keyword 'Mailchimp alternative.'",
      "assertions": [
        "Triggers on casual phrasing",
        "Identifies as singular alternative format",
        "Focuses on user's product as THE alternative",
        "Includes why people switch from Mailchimp",
        "Highlights e-commerce-specific advantages",
        "Includes feature and pricing comparison",
        "Includes migration guide",
        "Optimizes for singular keyword"
      ],
      "files": []
    },
    {
      "id": 4,
      "prompt": "Can you create a comparison page for 'Notion vs Coda'? We're a third-party review site, not affiliated with either product.",
      "expected_output": "Should identify this as the 'competitor vs competitor' format (third-party perspective). Should maintain objectivity since the user isn't either product. Should include balanced comparison: overview of both, feature comparison, pricing, pros/cons, use case recommendations. Should use the essential page sections from the skill. Should suggest how to monetize the page (affiliate links, CTA to the user's own product if relevant). Should address SEO for the 'Notion vs Coda' keyword.",
      "assertions": [
        "Identifies as 'competitor vs competitor' format",
        "Maintains objectivity (third-party perspective)",
        "Includes balanced feature comparison",
        "Includes pricing comparison",
        "Includes use case recommendations",
        "Addresses SEO considerations",
        "Suggests monetization approach"
      ],
      "files": []
    },
    {
      "id": 5,
      "prompt": "We want to build a whole competitor comparison hub. We have 5 main competitors and want to create alternative pages for each, plus head-to-head comparisons. How should we structure this?",
      "expected_output": "Should apply the centralized competitor data architecture. Should recommend a hub structure with: individual alternative pages for each competitor (5 singular pages), a 'best alternatives' roundup page, head-to-head comparison pages for key matchups. Should address internal linking strategy between these pages. Should recommend the research process for gathering competitive data. Should address URL structure and site architecture for the hub.",
      "assertions": [
        "Applies centralized competitor data architecture",
        "Recommends hub structure with multiple page types",
        "Suggests individual and roundup alternative pages",
        "Addresses internal linking between comparison pages",
        "Recommends research process for competitive data",
        "Addresses URL structure"
      ],
      "files": []
    },
    {
      "id": 6,
      "prompt": "I need to create a battle card for our sales team comparing us to Zendesk. It should help reps handle competitive objections during sales calls.",
      "expected_output": "Should recognize this as internal sales enablement material, not a public comparison page. Should defer to or cross-reference suede-sales-enablement, which handles battle cards, objection handling docs, and internal competitive collateral. May provide some competitive positioning advice but should make clear that suede-sales-enablement is the right skill for internal sales materials.",
      "assertions": [
        "Recognizes this as internal sales enablement material",
        "References or defers to suede-sales-enablement",
        "Does not attempt to create internal battle card using public comparison page patterns"
      ],
      "files": []
    }
  ]
}

# Content Architecture for Competitor Pages

How to structure and maintain competitor data for scalable comparison pages.

## Contents
- Centralized Competitor Data
- Competitor Data Template
- Your Product Data
- Page Generation
- Index Page Structure (alternatives index, vs comparisons index, index page best practices)
- Footer Navigation

## Centralized Competitor Data

Create a single source of truth for each competitor:

```
competitor_data/
├── notion.md
├── airtable.md
├── monday.md
└── ...
```

---

## Competitor Data Template

Per competitor, document:

```yaml
name: Notion
website: notion.so
tagline: "The all-in-one workspace"
founded: 2016
headquarters: San Francisco

# Positioning
primary_use_case: "docs + light databases"
target_audience: "teams wanting flexible workspace"
market_position: "premium, feature-rich"

# Pricing
pricing_model: per-seat
free_tier: true
free_tier_limits: "limited blocks, 1 user"
starter_price: $8/user/month
business_price: $15/user/month
enterprise: custom

# Features (rate 1-5 or describe)
features:
  documents: 5
  databases: 4
  project_management: 3
  collaboration: 4
  integrations: 3
  mobile_app: 3
  offline_mode: 2
  api: 4

# Strengths (be honest)
strengths:
  - Extremely flexible and customizable
  - Beautiful, modern interface
  - Strong template ecosystem
  - Active community

# Weaknesses (be fair)
weaknesses:
  - Can be slow with large databases
  - Learning curve for advanced features
  - Limited automations compared to dedicated tools
  - Offline mode is limited

# Best for
best_for:
  - Teams wanting all-in-one workspace
  - Content-heavy workflows
  - Documentation-first teams
  - Startups and small teams

# Not ideal for
not_ideal_for:
  - Complex project management needs
  - Large databases (1000s of rows)
  - Teams needing robust offline
  - Enterprise with strict compliance

# Common complaints (from reviews)
common_complaints:
  - "Gets slow with lots of content"
  - "Hard to find things as workspace grows"
  - "Mobile app is clunky"

# Migration notes
migration_from:
  difficulty: medium
  data_export: "Markdown, CSV, HTML"
  what_transfers: "Pages, databases"
  what_doesnt: "Automations, integrations setup"
  time_estimate: "1-3 days for small team"
```

---

## Your Product Data

Same structure for yourself—be honest:

```yaml
name: [Your Product]
# ... same fields

strengths:
  - [Your real strengths]

weaknesses:
  - [Your honest weaknesses]

best_for:
  - [Your ideal customers]

not_ideal_for:
  - [Who should use something else]
```

---

## Page Generation

Each page pulls from centralized data:

- **[Competitor] Alternative page**: Pulls competitor data + your data
- **[Competitor] Alternatives page**: Pulls competitor data + your data + other alternatives
- **You vs [Competitor] page**: Pulls your data + competitor data
- **[A] vs [B] page**: Pulls both competitor data + your data

**Benefits**:
- Update competitor pricing once, updates everywhere
- Add new feature comparison once, appears on all pages
- Consistent accuracy across pages
- Easier to maintain at scale

---

## Index Page Structure

### Alternatives Index

**URL**: `/alternatives` or `/alternatives/index`

**Purpose**: Lists all "[Competitor] Alternative" pages

**Page structure**:
1. Headline: "[Your Product] as an Alternative"
2. Brief intro on why people switch to you
3. List of all alternative pages with:
   - Competitor name/logo
   - One-line summary of key differentiator vs. that competitor
   - Link to full comparison
4. Common reasons people switch (aggregated)
5. CTA

**Example**:
```markdown
## Explore [Your Product] as an Alternative

Looking to switch? See how [Your Product] compares to the tools you're evaluating:

- **[Notion Alternative](/alternatives/notion)** — Better for teams who need [X]
- **[Airtable Alternative](/alternatives/airtable)** — Better for teams who need [Y]
- **[Monday Alternative](/alternatives/monday)** — Better for teams who need [Z]
```

---

### Vs Comparisons Index

**URL**: `/vs` or `/compare`

**Purpose**: Lists all "You vs [Competitor]" and "[A] vs [B]" pages

**Page structure**:
1. Headline: "Compare [Your Product]"
2. Section: "[Your Product] vs Competitors" — list of direct comparisons
3. Section: "Head-to-Head Comparisons" — list of [A] vs [B] pages
4. Brief methodology note
5. CTA

---

### Index Page Best Practices

**Keep them updated**: When you add a new comparison page, add it to the relevant index.

**Internal linking**:
- Link from index → individual pages
- Link from individual pages → back to index
- Cross-link between related comparisons

**SEO value**:
- Index pages can rank for broad terms like "project management tool comparisons"
- Pass link equity to individual comparison pages
- Help search engines discover all comparison content

**Sorting options**:
- By popularity (search volume)
- Alphabetically
- By category/use case
- By date added (show freshness)

**Include on index pages**:
- Last updated date for credibility
- Number of pages/comparisons available
- Quick filters if you have many comparisons

---

## Footer Navigation

The site footer appears on all marketing pages, making it a powerful internal linking opportunity for competitor pages.

### Option 1: Link to Index Pages (Minimum)

At minimum, add links to your comparison index pages in the footer:

```
Footer
├── Compare
│   ├── Alternatives →  /alternatives
│   └── Comparisons →  /vs
```

This ensures every marketing page passes link equity to your comparison content hub.

### Option 2: Footer Columns by Format (Recommended for SEO)

For stronger internal linking, create dedicated footer columns for each format you've built, linking directly to your top competitors:

```
Footer
├── [Product] vs               ├── Alternatives to            ├── Compare
│   ├── vs Notion              │   ├── Notion Alternative     │   ├── Notion vs Airtable
│   ├── vs Airtable            │   ├── Airtable Alternative   │   ├── Monday vs Asana
│   ├── vs Monday              │   ├── Monday Alternative     │   ├── Notion vs Monday
│   ├── vs Asana               │   ├── Asana Alternative      │   ├── ...
│   ├── vs Clickup             │   ├── Clickup Alternative    │   └── View all →
│   ├── ...                    │   ├── ...                    │
│   └── View all →             │   └── View all →             │
```

**Guidelines**:
- Include up to 8 links per column (top competitors by search volume)
- Add "View all" link to the full index page
- Only create columns for formats you've actually built pages for
- Prioritize competitors with highest search volume

### Why Footer Links Matter

1. **Sitewide distribution**: Footer links appear on every marketing page, passing link equity from your entire site to comparison content
2. **Crawl efficiency**: Search engines discover all comparison pages quickly
3. **User discovery**: Visitors evaluating your product can easily find comparisons
4. **Competitive positioning**: Signals to search engines that you're a key player in the space

### Implementation Notes

- Update footer when adding new high-priority comparison pages
- Keep footer clean—don't list every comparison, just the top ones
- Match column headers to your URL structure (e.g., "vs" column → `/vs/` URLs)
- Consider mobile: columns may stack, so order by priority

# Section Templates for Competitor Pages

Ready-to-use templates for each section of competitor comparison pages.

## Contents
- TL;DR Summary
- Paragraph Comparison (Not Just Tables)
- Feature Comparison Section
- Pricing Comparison Section
- Service & Support Comparison
- Who It's For Section
- Migration Section
- Social Proof Section
- Comparison Table Best Practices (beyond checkmarks, organize by category, include ratings where useful)

## TL;DR Summary

Start every page with a quick summary for scanners:

```markdown
**TL;DR**: [Competitor] excels at [strength] but struggles with [weakness].
[Your product] is built for [your focus], offering [key differentiator].
Choose [Competitor] if [their ideal use case]. Choose [You] if [your ideal use case].
```

---

## Paragraph Comparison (Not Just Tables)

For each major dimension, write a paragraph:

```markdown
## Features

[Competitor] offers [description of their feature approach].
Their strength is [specific strength], which works well for [use case].
However, [limitation] can be challenging for [user type].

[Your product] takes a different approach with [your approach].
This means [benefit], though [honest tradeoff].
Teams who [specific need] often find this more effective.
```

---

## Feature Comparison Section

Go beyond checkmarks:

```markdown
## Feature Comparison

### [Feature Category]

**[Competitor]**: [2-3 sentence description of how they handle this]
- Strengths: [specific]
- Limitations: [specific]

**[Your product]**: [2-3 sentence description]
- Strengths: [specific]
- Limitations: [specific]

**Bottom line**: Choose [Competitor] if [scenario]. Choose [You] if [scenario].
```

---

## Pricing Comparison Section

```markdown
## Pricing

| | [Competitor] | [Your Product] |
|---|---|---|
| Free tier | [Details] | [Details] |
| Starting price | $X/user/mo | $X/user/mo |
| Business tier | $X/user/mo | $X/user/mo |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom |

**What's included**: [Competitor]'s $X plan includes [features], while
[Your product]'s $X plan includes [features].

**Total cost consideration**: Beyond per-seat pricing, consider [hidden costs,
add-ons, implementation]. [Competitor] charges extra for [X], while
[Your product] includes [Y] in base pricing.

**Value comparison**: For a 10-person team, [Competitor] costs approximately
$X/year while [Your product] costs $Y/year, with [key differences in what you get].
```

---

## Service & Support Comparison

```markdown
## Service & Support

| | [Competitor] | [Your Product] |
|---|---|---|
| Documentation | [Quality assessment] | [Quality assessment] |
| Response time | [SLA if known] | [Your SLA] |
| Support channels | [List] | [List] |
| Onboarding | [What they offer] | [What you offer] |
| CSM included | [At what tier] | [At what tier] |

**Support quality**: Based on [G2/Capterra reviews, your research],
[Competitor] support is described as [assessment]. Common feedback includes
[quotes or themes].

[Your product] offers [your support approach]. [Specific differentiator like
response time, dedicated CSM, implementation help].
```

---

## Who It's For Section

```markdown
## Who Should Choose [Competitor]

[Competitor] is the right choice if:
- [Specific use case or need]
- [Team type or size]
- [Workflow or requirement]
- [Budget or priority]

**Ideal [Competitor] customer**: [Persona description in 1-2 sentences]

## Who Should Choose [Your Product]

[Your product] is built for teams who:
- [Specific use case or need]
- [Team type or size]
- [Workflow or requirement]
- [Priority or value]

**Ideal [Your product] customer**: [Persona description in 1-2 sentences]
```

---

## Migration Section

```markdown
## Switching from [Competitor]

### What transfers
- [Data type]: [How easily, any caveats]
- [Data type]: [How easily, any caveats]

### What needs reconfiguration
- [Thing]: [Why and effort level]
- [Thing]: [Why and effort level]

### Migration support

We offer [migration support details]:
- [Free data import tool / white-glove migration]
- [Documentation / migration guide]
- [Timeline expectation]
- [Support during transition]

### What customers say about switching

> "[Quote from customer who switched]"
> — [Name], [Role] at [Company]
```

---

## Social Proof Section

Focus on switchers:

```markdown
## What Customers Say

### Switched from [Competitor]

> "[Specific quote about why they switched and outcome]"
> — [Name], [Role] at [Company]

> "[Another quote]"
> — [Name], [Role] at [Company]

### Results after switching
- [Company] saw [specific result]
- [Company] reduced [metric] by [amount]
```

---

## Comparison Table Best Practices

### Beyond Checkmarks

Instead of:
| Feature | You | Competitor |
|---------|-----|-----------|
| Feature A | ✓ | ✓ |
| Feature B | ✓ | ✗ |

Do this:
| Feature | You | Competitor |
|---------|-----|-----------|
| Feature A | Full support with [detail] | Basic support, [limitation] |
| Feature B | [Specific capability] | Not available |

### Organize by Category

Group features into meaningful categories:
- Core functionality
- Collaboration
- Integrations
- Security & compliance
- Support & service

### Include Ratings Where Useful

| Category | You | Competitor | Notes |
|----------|-----|-----------|-------|
| Ease of use | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | [Brief note] |
| Feature depth | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | [Brief note] |