竞品调研方法架构

---
name: competitive-research
description: Structured competitor and market research for product, GTM, pricing, positioning, user demand, and alternative-solution analysis. Use when the user asks for 竞品调研, competitive research, competitor analysis, market mapping, product comparison, pricing comparison, GTM research, user-signal synthesis, or decision-ready research briefs.
---

# Competitive Research

## Core Workflow

Use this skill to turn competitor information into a decision-ready brief, not a pile of notes.

1. State the decision question before collecting facts.
2. Map the market before deep-diving one company.
3. Analyze each competitor with the same dimensions.
4. Label evidence quality for every important conclusion.
5. Prioritize user signals over website copy.
6. End with implications, open questions, and recommended next validation steps.

## Required Output Shape

Prefer this structure unless the user asks for another format:

```markdown
# Competitive Research: <topic>

## Decision Question
<What decision this research should support>

## Market Map
<direct competitors, indirect competitors, substitutes, platforms, open-source options>

## Competitor Breakdown
<repeat the same dimensions per competitor>

## Comparison Table
<positioning, ICP, core use case, capabilities, pricing, distribution, strengths, weaknesses>

## User Signals
<what users praise, complain about, switch from, and pay for>

## Strategic Implications
<what to copy, avoid, differentiate, test next>

## Evidence Notes
<source, date, evidence level, confidence>
```

## Evidence Levels

Use evidence labels consistently:

- `L1 Official`: company website, docs, pricing page, changelog, official demo, public job posts.
- `L2 Third-party`: user reviews, Reddit/HN/X/YouTube, G2, Product Hunt, media, traffic tools, funding/news databases.
- `L3 Inference`: reasoned interpretation from observed product, pricing, messaging, traffic, or user behavior. Mark as inference.

For important claims, include source, date, evidence level, and confidence.

## Research Rules

- Do not start with "what does this company do?" Start with "what decision are we trying to make?"
- Do not compare competitors using different dimensions unless the asymmetry is the insight.
- Do not treat homepage positioning as truth. Cross-check with docs, pricing, user complaints, and observed workflows.
- Separate feature demand from willingness to pay.
- Separate loud discussion from commercial value.
- Make uncertainty explicit. A useful `unknown` is better than a fake conclusion.

## Detailed Method

For a deeper version, add `references/method.md` with your full teardown framework: market map, fixed competitor dimensions, evidence levels, user-signal analysis, decision outputs, comparison table, and public sharing hygiene.

# Competitive Research Project Instructions

Use this project for structured competitor and market research. The goal is to turn messy market information into decision-ready briefs, not generic summaries.

## Default Workflow

1. Start with the decision question.
2. Build a market map before deep-diving into individual companies.
3. Analyze competitors with consistent dimensions.
4. Separate facts, third-party signals, and inference.
5. Prioritize user behavior and user complaints over homepage copy.
6. End with strategic implications and next validation steps.

## Required Research Dimensions

For each competitor, capture:

- One-line positioning
- ICP and primary user
- Core use case and adoption trigger
- Core capability and product mechanism
- Activation path, retention driver, and switching cost
- Business model and pricing
- Distribution and GTM channels
- Moat and weaknesses
- User sentiment and repeated complaints
- What we should learn, avoid, or test

## Evidence Rules

Use evidence labels:

- L1 Official: website, docs, pricing page, changelog, official demo, public job posts.
- L2 Third-party: user reviews, Reddit, Hacker News, X, YouTube, G2, Product Hunt, media, traffic tools.
- L3 Inference: reasoned interpretation based on observed product, pricing, messaging, traffic, or user behavior.

Important claims should include source, date, evidence level, and confidence. If evidence is weak, say so directly.

## Output Format

Prefer this structure:

1. Decision Question
2. Market Map
3. Competitor Breakdown
4. Comparison Table
5. User Signals
6. Strategic Implications
7. Open Questions
8. Next Validation Steps

Do not produce a polished-sounding report if the evidence does not support it. Make uncertainty visible.