Files
marketingskills/skills/competitors/references/templates.md
T
Corey Haines 30f9b9a729 feat: v2.0 skill renames and CRO consolidation (#291)
* feat: v2.0 skill renames and CRO consolidation

BREAKING CHANGE: Users must reinstall skills after this update.

## Skill Renames (16)
- ab-test-setup → ab-testing
- analytics-tracking → analytics
- aso-audit → aso
- competitor-alternatives → competitors
- email-sequence → emails
- free-tool-strategy → free-tools
- launch-strategy → launch
- onboarding-cro → onboarding
- paywall-upgrade-cro → paywalls
- popup-cro → popups
- pricing-strategy → pricing
- product-marketing-context → product-marketing
- referral-program → referrals
- schema-markup → schema
- signup-flow-cro → signup
- social-content → social

## Consolidations (1)
- page-cro + form-cro → cro (form content in references/form.md)

## Why 2.0?
- Shorter, cleaner skill names
- Consistent naming (no -strategy, -setup, -cro suffixes)
- All cross-references updated across 100+ files

Total skills: 40

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix(v2.0): update evals for renamed skills, fix validate script, clear warnings

- Update 32 evals.json files to reference new skill names (page-cro → cro,
  product-marketing-context → product-marketing, etc.) — these were missed
  in the initial v2.0 rename pass since only SKILL.md and marketplace.json
  were updated.
- Fix validate-skills.sh: replace GNU-only `head -n -1` with portable awk
  so frontmatter extraction works on macOS.
- Move Copy Editing Checklist (56 lines) to references/checklist.md to
  bring copy-editing SKILL.md under the 500-line limit (508 → 457).
- Add "see X" pointers to marketing-psychology description for skill
  discovery (cro, pricing, copywriting).
- Update skill-request.yml issue template placeholder (page-cro → cro).

All 40 skills now pass validation with zero warnings.

* fix(v2.0): add evals for 8 missing skills, strip stale frontmatter from cro/form.md

Adds 48 new eval cases (6 per skill) for skills that previously had no evals:
aso, co-marketing, community-marketing, competitor-profiling, directory-submissions,
image, lead-magnets, video. All 40 skills now have eval coverage (251 total cases).

Strips leftover frontmatter from skills/cro/references/form.md — it was inherited
from the old form-cro SKILL.md before consolidation. Reference files don't need
frontmatter.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix(v2.0): rename paid-ads → ads

One more v2.0 simplification — drops the redundant 'paid-' qualifier. Updates
the skill directory, SKILL.md frontmatter, evals.json, README skill table, the
v2.0 rename table in VERSIONS.md (now 17 renames), and all cross-references in
related skills (ad-creative, aso, competitor-profiling, customer-research,
lead-magnets, marketing-ideas) plus the tools/integrations guides.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix(v2.0): bump SKILL.md frontmatter version to 2.0.0 for all 40 skills

VERSIONS.md was already updated to 2.0.0 but the metadata.version field inside
each SKILL.md was still on 1.x. That mismatch would have caused the update-check
flow to perpetually report 'update available' since it compares VERSIONS.md
against local SKILL.md metadata versions.

Caught by codex review (P1).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix(v2.0): add legacy product-marketing-context.md filename fallback

Before this fix, users upgrading from v1.x who had a `product-marketing-context.md`
file would lose automatic context loading — every skill only checked the new
`product-marketing.md` filename. Now all 40 skills also accept the legacy
filename (in either `.agents/` or `.claude/`), and the README migration command
covers both legacy and current filenames.

Caught by codex review (P1 + P2).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix(v2.0): re-sort README skills table alphabetically, fix ads box width

The skills table had a few entries out of alphabetical order from the renames
(co-marketing was after cold-email, ads was at the renamed position).
Re-sorted alphabetically per sync-skills.js. Also padded the 'ads' cell in the
ASCII flow diagram to keep the box width consistent.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix(v2.0): document folder cleanup on upgrade, stop sync-skills from re-adding skills array

README upgrade guide now includes:
- A clear cleanup step for stale v1.x skill folders (renamed + consolidated) so
  users don't end up with both old and new folders side-by-side after upgrading
- The full v1 to v2 rename map for reference
- Existing product-marketing-context.md migration steps (preserved)

sync-skills.js no longer (re-)introduces a `skills` array on marketplace.json --
Claude Code's plugin schema discovers skills via the `skills/` directory, and the
explicit array was failing validation. The script now refreshes the description
count and strips the stale array if present.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-13 22:05:15 -07:00

5.3 KiB

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:

**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:

## 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:

## 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

## 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

## 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

## 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

## 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:

## 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]