Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add skills/aneja5/forge-skills/competitive-analysisnpx skills add aneja5/forge-skills --skill competitive-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aneja5/forge-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/aneja5/forge-skills/competitive-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/aneja5/forge-skills/competitive-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/aneja5/forge-skills/competitive-analysis.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00055 | $0.01180 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00590 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00236 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00118 |
Grade A, and why
competitive-analysis scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 6d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Competitive Analysis
Overview
Read .forge/prd.md to understand what we're building, then produce .forge/competitive.md — an honest assessment of the competitive landscape with actionable positioning. The output must be brutally honest about where we lose, not just where we win.
When to Use
.forge/prd.mdexists and the product is entering a market with existing players- User asks "who are the competitors" or "how do we differentiate"
- Preparing for GTM and need positioning statements and objection handling
- Investor pitch requires competitive landscape slide
When NOT to Use
- No PRD exists — run
spec-driven-developmentfirst (you need to know what you're building to compare) - The product creates a new category with no direct competitors — focus on adjacent alternatives instead
- User wants a quick opinion, not a structured analysis — just answer the question
Common Rationalizations
| Thought | Reality |
|---|---|
| "We don't have real competitors" | You always have competitors — at minimum, the status quo (spreadsheets, manual process) |
| "We're better at everything" | No product wins on every axis. If your matrix shows all green, you're lying to yourself |
| "Pricing research takes too long" | Public pricing pages take 10 minutes. If pricing is hidden, that IS the data point |
| "Our moat is obvious" | If you can't name it in one sentence, you don't have one |
| "Win/lose scenarios are speculative" | They're based on feature gaps and buyer priorities — that's analysis, not speculation |
Red Flags
- Feature matrix shows you winning every category (cheerleading, not analysis)
- "Lose" scenarios are empty or dismissive ("unlikely")
- Competitor profiles are surface-level (just website taglines)
- Positioning statement is more than one sentence
- No mention of the status quo as a competitor (incumbent inertia)
- Objection responses are generic ("we're better") instead of specific
Core Process
Step 1: Identify competitors
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 6d ago First seen · 106 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A f8ce978edba5
competitive-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository aneja5/forge-skills (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 1,180 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
link-ticket-to-session
Link the current Claude Code session to a ticket (Linear, Jira, GitHub Issues, or GitHub Pull Requests) and cache its title/status in karma. Use when the user explicitly asks to link, attach, associate, or connect this session to a ticket, issue, or PR — e.g. "/link-ticket-to-session ABC-123", "link this session to…
implement
Use when implementing a spec or GitHub ticket in this checkout.
loop-on-ci
Monitor PR checks and fix failures until green. Uses gh pr checks as the source of truth for PR-attached checks.
run-smoke-tests
Run Playwright smoke tests, debug failures, and verify fixes. Use for smoke, e2e, Playwright, or pre-ship browser verification.
browser-use
Drive a real browser to QA a running app. Screenshots, clicks, forms, evidence. Use when there is no Playwright suite, or when a human flow must be walked.
tdd
Use when implementing features or bug fixes test-first.