competitor-analysis

The full skill.

Original instructions from the publisher’s SKILL.md

# OpenSEO Competitor Analysis

## Goal

Analyze one competitor deeply enough to decide what to learn from, avoid, counter-position against, or outrank.

Use this for a named competitor. For identifying the market leaders first, use `competitive-landscape`.

## Required inputs

- `projectId`
- Competitor domain
- User's domain when comparison is requested
- Optional topic/category/location/language

## Project context

The project-context tools are free and shared with the app and other agents.

1. Call `get_project_context` first and ground the analysis in it — the saved competitors say whether this domain is already known and what was concluded about it before.
2. This skill needs competitors. If none are saved, run a minimal inline setup: save the competitor being analyzed, and ask the user (or infer from `find_serp_competitors` and confirm) whether there are others, write them back with `update_project_context` (`addCompetitors`), then continue the analysis. Never front-load the full interview; suggest `seo-project-setup` at the end for the rest.
3. Before spending credits, check the research log. If the same research ran within the last 30 days, reuse that result and say so instead of re-buying it.
4. On finish, write back what is durable with `update_project_context` — an `addCompetitors` upsert for this domain with a short note on its strengths and where it is vulnerable — and append a research log entry: `{ appendResearchLog: { summary: "Competitor analysis: <domain>. Verdict: <conclusion>" } }`.

## Deliver as a report

Deliver through the `seo-report` skill, saving with `skill: "competitor-analysis"`. If that skill is not available, say so and stop before writing HTML.

## OpenSEO MCP tools

- `get_domain_overview`: baseline organic traffic and keyword count.
- `get_search_console_performance`: when comparing to the user's own domain and Search Console is connected, use it as the first-party baseline (real clicks/impressions/CTR/position) instead of estimating the user's own performance from third-party data.
- `get_ranked_keywords`: exact keyword, URL, rank, intent, traffic, CPC, and SERP-type rows for the competitor domain or page.
- `get_backlinks_overview`: backlink/referring-domain profile.
- `find_serp_competitors`: validate whether the named competitor is a real search competitor across the target keyword set.
- `search_local_businesses`, `get_local_serp_results`, and `get_google_business_questions`: use for local SEO competitors when Maps/local-pack visibility, nearby businesses, categories, or Google Q&A matter.
- `get_serp_results`: validate direct head-to-head SERPs for important keywords.
- `research_keywords`: expand gaps or category terms when needed.

## Workflow

1. Call `get_domain_overview` for the competitor, passing provided location/language when supported.
2. If comparing to the user, call `get_domain_overview` for the user's domain too — and if Search Console is connected, `get_search_console_performance` for the user's real baseline.
3. Call `get_ranked_keywords` for the competitor. Use filters like `maxRank`, `minSearchVolume`, `excludeBrandTerms`, and `resultTypes` to keep rows relevant.
4. If comparing to the user, call `get_ranked_keywords` for the user's domain/page too, or use `get_serp_results` for the shared terms when a lighter check is enough.
5. For local SEO, use `search_local_businesses` and `get_local_serp_results` around the relevant business location(s) before drawing local-pack conclusions. Add `get_google_business_questions` only when Q&A evidence matters.
6. Use `find_serp_competitors` when the competitor was supplied by the user but its search overlap is unclear.
7. Group competitor keywords into themes:
   - Product/category terms
   - Alternatives/comparisons
   - Templates/tools/calculators
   - Educational guides
   - Branded demand
   - Local/neighborhood terms when relevant
8. Call `get_backlinks_overview` for the competitor, especially if authority appears to explain rankings. Continue without backlink evidence if it is unavailable.
9. Use `get_serp_results` for important shared or target keywords to compare positioning, passing provided location/language when supported.
10. Produce an actionable plan:
    - What they are doing well
    - Where they are vulnerable
    - Which pages/keywords to pursue
    - What to avoid copying

## Output format

`h1`: the competitor domain.

If a report template applies (see `seo-report`), its sections and tone replace this list.

Sections in this order:

1. **Snapshot** — one or two opening sentences, then a table of the competitor's organic footprint (traffic estimate, keyword count, referring domains). Add the user's domain as a second row when comparing.
2. **The biggest lesson** — one finding.
3. **Where they are vulnerable** — one finding per opening, ordered by how winnable it is.
4. **Keyword themes** — a table of theme, example keywords, volume, and whether the user competes there. A bar chart when a few themes dominate the footprint.
5. **Content patterns and authority** — prose, with a note for anything inferred from keyword rows rather than seen on a page.
6. **What to do next** — an ordered list, shortest useful.
7. **How this report was made** — opens with the skill link line from `seo-report`, pointing at `https://openseo.so/docs/skills/competitor-analysis` ("OpenSEO Competitor Analysis skill"), then which tools reported what, and what you checked yourself.

## Guardrails

- Do not treat all competitor keywords as desirable. Filter for business fit.
- Separate evidence from inference.
- Do not infer competitor page/content-type patterns from keyword rows alone; use SERP or web evidence for page-level claims.
- For local SEO, do not infer Maps/local-pack strength from national organic domain metrics alone; use local business and local SERP tools when the location is known or reasonably discoverable.
- Do not recommend copying content; recommend a stronger angle or better answer to the same intent.
- If the user's domain is unavailable, frame the analysis as competitor-only.