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 skills add Ootto-AI/claude-content-skills --skill competitor-positioninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Ootto-AI/claude-content-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/ootto-ai/claude-content-skills/competitor-positioning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ootto-ai/claude-content-skills/competitor-positioning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ootto-ai/claude-content-skills/competitor-positioning/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ootto-ai/claude-content-skills/competitor-positioning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ootto-ai/claude-content-skills/competitor-positioning.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00113 | $0.00644 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00056 | $0.00322 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00129 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
competitor-positioning 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 11d 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 — 46 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Competitor Positioning
Compare observable market messages without turning a competitor scan into a claim sheet or imitation exercise.
1. Define the comparison question
Ask which customer decision, category, and alternatives matter. Gather dated public pages, posts, pricing, documentation, or approved internal notes. Record source URLs or excerpts and dates. If a source cannot be verified, label it as an unverified lead rather than a fact.
2. Separate message from capability
For each alternative, map the audience it addresses, problem framing, promise, proof style, price or access signal if public, and visible limitations. Do not assume a marketing claim proves a feature, or that a missing page proves absence of a capability.
3. Compare against our real evidence
Map our approved product facts, customer language, proof, constraints, and category choice beside the alternatives. Look for a difference that is relevant to the audience and supported by something we can demonstrate. A useful difference may be a workflow, point of view, fit, or trade-off, not a superiority claim.
4. Produce positioning choices and guardrails
Return possible message territories with supporting evidence, risk, and the phrases or claims to avoid. Include the uncertainty that needs verification. Recommend one position to test through positioning-audit or campaign-brief, not a sweeping declaration that the market is settled.
Hard rules
- Do not state or imply false facts about a competitor's features, pricing, customers, policies, or results.
- Attribute public observations to their source and date; products and pages change.
- Never copy distinctive competitor language, structure, or creative expression.
- Treat absence of evidence as unknown, not as proof a competitor cannot do something.
- Do not use comparative claims in public copy without legal and product approval.
Failure modes
| Failure | Do this instead |
|---|---|
| The scan becomes a feature checklist | Compare the customer decision, promise, proof, and trade-offs. |
| Competitor claims are repeated as facts | Quote or summarize the source as their stated message, with date. |
| The outcome is "we are better" | Name one relevant, demonstrable difference and its boundary. |
| The team copies a rival's framing | Return to our evidence and customer language before choosing a position. |
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 46 lines · 113 tokens per session scan A 1c2c086d2783
competitor-positioning is a skill published in the GitHub repository Ootto-AI/claude-content-skills (28 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 113 tokens to every session and 644 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
scrapecreators-api
Scrape and extract public data from 27+ social media platforms using the ScrapeCreators REST API. Covers TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter/X, Reddit, Threads, Bluesky, Pinterest, Snapchat, Twitch, Kick, Truth Social, TikTok Shop, Google, and link-in-bio services (Linktree, Komi, Pillar, Linkbio…
outlier-post-finder
Use when the user wants to find posts, videos, reels, shorts, tweets, or social content that overperformed versus a creator, brand, or competitor baseline. Finds outliers, explains why they worked, extracts hooks and formats, and produces a practical swipe file.
competitor-social-research
Use when the user wants to research competitors' social media strategy, compare brands or creators, find what content is working in a niche, identify content gaps, or produce a practical social strategy brief from public social data.
ad-library-teardown
Use when the user wants to analyze active ads from Meta/Facebook, Google, or LinkedIn ad libraries; tear down a competitor's messaging; extract hooks, offers, CTAs, video transcripts, landing page claims, and test ideas from public ads.
comment-mining
Use when the user wants to mine comments and replies for audience reactions, customer language, questions, objections, complaints, product ideas, buying intent, sentiment, or voice-of-customer insights from public social posts and videos.
transcript-intelligence
Use when the user wants to summarize, analyze, or repurpose transcripts from TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, X/Twitter, LinkedIn, Rumble, or Reddit video posts. Extracts hooks, claims, quotes, content atoms, themes, and reusable scripts.