Competitive Brief
Produce a decision-oriented comparison, not a feature dump.
Workflow
- Establish the decision, target user, comparison scope, and relevant competitors. Include direct, indirect, substitute, and plausible adjacent options when useful.
- Research current first-party product, pricing, documentation, changelog, and positioning sources. Use credible secondary evidence for customer sentiment or market context.
- Record source dates. Separate verified facts, customer reports, and your inferences.
- Compare only dimensions that affect the decision: target user, workflow, capabilities, packaging, strengths, weaknesses, and momentum.
- Analyze each competitor's category claim, promised outcome, differentiator, and proof.
- Derive strategic implications: where to differentiate, where parity matters, what to deprioritize, and what to monitor.
Output
## Competitive Brief
### Decision and Scope
Decision, target user, competitors, and research date.
### Landscape
Direct, indirect, substitutes, and adjacent entrants.
### Comparison
| Dimension | Us | Competitor A | Competitor B | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
### Positioning
Target, category, promised outcome, differentiator, and proof for each.
### Strengths, Weaknesses, and Momentum
Evidence-backed, without dismissive language.
### Strategic Implications
Differentiate / reach parity / deprioritize / monitor.
### Unknowns
Claims that could not be verified and next checks.
Quality Gates
- Cite current sources near the claims they support.
- Do not treat missing public evidence as proof that a capability does not exist.
- Do not invent market share, revenue, customer counts, or roadmap intent.
- Make recommendations specific to the stated decision and user.
1---2name: competitive-brief3description: Build an evidence-based competitive brief for a product, competitor set, or feature area. Use when deciding differentiation versus parity, informing product strategy, or preparing a concise competitive view.4---56# Competitive Brief78Produce a decision-oriented comparison, not a feature dump.910## Workflow11121. Establish the decision, target user, comparison scope, and relevant competitors. Include direct, indirect, substitute, and plausible adjacent options when useful.132. Research current first-party product, pricing, documentation, changelog, and positioning sources. Use credible secondary evidence for customer sentiment or market context.143. Record source dates. Separate verified facts, customer reports, and your inferences.154. Compare only dimensions that affect the decision: target user, workflow, capabilities, packaging, strengths, weaknesses, and momentum.165. Analyze each competitor's category claim, promised outcome, differentiator, and proof.176. Derive strategic implications: where to differentiate, where parity matters, what to deprioritize, and what to monitor.1819## Output2021```markdown22## Competitive Brief2324### Decision and Scope25Decision, target user, competitors, and research date.2627### Landscape28Direct, indirect, substitutes, and adjacent entrants.2930### Comparison31| Dimension | Us | Competitor A | Competitor B | Evidence |32|---|---|---|---|---|3334### Positioning35Target, category, promised outcome, differentiator, and proof for each.3637### Strengths, Weaknesses, and Momentum38Evidence-backed, without dismissive language.3940### Strategic Implications41Differentiate / reach parity / deprioritize / monitor.4243### Unknowns44Claims that could not be verified and next checks.45```4647## Quality Gates4849- Cite current sources near the claims they support.50- Do not treat missing public evidence as proof that a capability does not exist.51- Do not invent market share, revenue, customer counts, or roadmap intent.52- Make recommendations specific to the stated decision and user.
cogine-ai