Install
openclaw skills install @mohitagw15856/competitor-teardownProduce a structured competitive analysis for any product or market. Use when asked for a competitor analysis, competitive teardown, market comparison, SWOT, or positioning map. Generates a structured teardown with positioning map, feature comparison, messaging gaps, and strategic recommendations. For a full landscape doc with feature matrix and win/loss analysis use competitive-analysis instead.
openclaw skills install @mohitagw15856/competitor-teardownThis skill produces a complete competitive analysis document — structured for use in strategy decks, investor materials, sales enablement, or product planning sessions.
Ask the user for these if not provided:
One paragraph summarising the market dynamic: who the key players are, how the market is segmented, and where the white space sits. Keep this under 150 words — it's the exec summary.
Describe a 2x2 positioning map in text form (since you can't render images):
| Feature / Capability | [Your Product] | [Competitor A] | [Competitor B] | [Competitor C] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Feature] | ✅ / ❌ / 🟡 Partial |
Use ✅ (has it), ❌ (doesn't have it), 🟡 (partial/limited). Add a "Strategic Notes" column for features where the difference is a significant selling point or risk.
Include 10–15 rows. If user hasn't provided feature details, note which cells need to be verified.
For each competitor, analyse their public-facing messaging (website headline, tagline, primary value prop):
[Competitor Name]
Produce a clean SWOT for the user's product in the context of this competitive landscape:
3–5 actionable recommendations based on the analysis. Frame each as: "Given [observation], [your product] should [action] to [outcome]."
Score any output of this skill before handing it over; 32+ is ship-quality.
| Dimension | 0 | 5 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Map meaningfulness | Axes are generic (price × quality) | Market-specific axes but positions unjustified | Axes capture the real buying tension in this market and every placement is defensible |
| Comparative depth | Feature table is checkmarks | Features compared with some notes | Differentiators carry strategic notes explaining why the gap matters and to whom |
| SWOT honesty | Weaknesses/threats softened to niceties | Honest but unprioritized | Weaknesses and threats stated plainly, ranked by how much they should worry you |
| Recommendation specificity | Generic strategy advice | Actionable but unlinked to findings | Each recommendation follows "given [observation], do [action] to [outcome]" and traces to the analysis |