GeorgeQLe Pack Availability Guard
Before telling the user to run a skill from another project-local pack, check .agents/project.json.enabled_packs. If the target pack is not enabled, recommend npx skillpacks install <pack> from the project shell, instead of the target skill. Only the currently running skill and skills verified available in the active session or project-local install state are directly recommendable. For unavailable pack skills, recommend npx skillpacks install <pack-or-skill>; for unavailable base skills, recommend npx skillpacks init before the skill.
Feature/Pricing Matrix - Competitive Offer Analysis
Parent Orchestrator Routing
Run only through the parent orchestrator $competitive-analysis as part of its Research Session Loop. If the user needs to continue pending framework work, tell them to start a fresh Codex session and re-invoke $competitive-analysis with the same product/research path argument when present, for example $competitive-analysis research/afps-tracker.
Do not ask users to invoke this framework directly or with a path-shaped child framework command. Do not emit downstream routing labels, child-framework commands, execution-loop commands, or downstream skill recommendations from this framework subskill.
Terminal Handoff Contract
When this framework is run inline and stops on its findings review page, the terminal response must end with:
## Next Work
Review the framework findings page, compile YAML, clear context, and paste the compiled YAML into a fresh session. The parent will consume that YAML, write the approved intermediate, and recalculate whether another framework or synthesis is next.
The compiled YAML must carry the parent command (for example, $competitive-analysis) in command and agent_routing.command.
Use the same product/research path argument when present. Do not decide from inside the framework whether the next parent run executes another framework or synthesis; the parent orchestrator recalculates that from the run manifest and canonical-intermediate files after approval.
The findings review page must also include agent_routing in bottom compiled YAML with this parent-owned shape:
agent_routing:
workflow: pattern-a-research-loop
parent_skill: competitive-analysis
command: "$competitive-analysis research/{slug}"
product_path: research/{slug}
gate_owner: parent-orchestrator
gate_type: framework-findings
framework_slug: feature-pricing-matrix
framework_mode: inline-subskill
run_manifest: research/{slug}/_working/competitive-analysis-run.yaml
next_resolution: parent-resolves-from-yaml-and-filesystem
Omit product_path in flat mode, keep command identical to agent_routing.command, and never replace it with a child framework path command. The parent consumes this YAML, writes the approved intermediate, archives the working packet/page, and recalculates the next state.
Report-First Approval Gate
Default to scope-first approval: before synthesized research, inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions in a review alignment page plus a concise conversation summary.
Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets or canonical deliverables until final compiled YAML approves the research scope. Minimal pre-approval discovery may identify available files, source categories, and open questions; label it as scope evidence, not findings.
After approved research-scope YAML, perform the research and write only the non-canonical working packet defined in the staged workflow. Then update the review alignment page with findings and stop again for feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML artifact approval before creating or updating canonical research, spec, or task files.
Do not include downstream routing language. While the framework findings page is in review, use only the parent-owned terminal handoff sections above. Parent synthesis owns downstream routing only after approved synthesis artifacts are written or updated.
Staged Research Workflow
Use this staged workflow for synthesized research or report outputs that would create or update canonical research, spec, or task files.
- Stage 0 - Interrogation/context handoff. When this framework is run inline by the parent
competitive-analysisorchestrator, the parent's completed interrogation handoff plus approved multi-select framework scope satisfies this framework's pre-research context gate. Consume the inherited context and enter Stage 2; do not ask the user to invoke this framework directly or run a child-specific command. If this framework is invoked outside the parent loop, stop and route the user back to the parent orchestrator. - Stage 1 - Scope discovery and approval. Inspect only enough repository, user, and source context to propose research scope, source plan, assumptions, output paths, and approval questions. Build the
reviewHTML alignment page before synthesized research. The page must render the proposed scope, available source categories, known context, assumptions/confidence, proposed working-packet and canonical output paths, and research-scope approval gates. Stop for final compiled YAML approval of the research scope. Do not perform synthesized research, rank candidates, make recommendations, or write working packets, canonical research, spec, or task files in Stage 1. - Stage 2 - Research and artifact review. Only after approved research-scope YAML with no unresolved
needs-clarification, unresolveddownfeedback, or other unresolved negative feedback, perform the synthesized research, run required source/code checks, and write only a non-canonical working packet: flat mode usesresearch/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md; product-path mode usesresearch/{slug}/_working/preliminary-<skill>-research.md. Replace<skill>with this skill'snamevalue. Raw evidence or search logs may remain as supporting evidence where this skill already requires them, but synthesized deliverables stay in the working packet. Update thereviewHTML alignment page so it renders the complete working-packet substance as structured HTML review UI: purpose-built sections, tables, matrices, gates, cards, and tier-appropriate charts or diagrams that preserve every packet section, finding, caveat, and decision detail without summary loss. Raw Markdown packet text may appear only as a supplemental source view after the rendered review UI; do not make aFull Preliminary PacketorFull Working Packetraw Markdown dump, giant<pre><code>block, link-only view, or source-only view the primary review surface. Include the evidence matrix, assumptions/confidence register, source coverage gaps, proposed canonical file changes, and artifact approval gates. Stop for either feedback-only YAML or final compiled YAML. Feedback-only YAML revises the working packet and page, then remains in Stage 2. - Stage 3 - Finalize approved artifacts. Consume final compiled YAML for artifact approval only when it has no unresolved
needs-clarification, unresolveddownfeedback, or other unresolved negative feedback. Apply approved edits first, archive the working packet todocs/history/archive/YYYY-MM-DD/HHMMSS/<original-working-path>, remove the active working packet, write the approved canonical artifacts to the unchanged output paths below, and convert the alignment page toconfirmedwith the approval record preserved.
Canonical output paths remain unchanged. Search logs and other supporting evidence remain allowed only where this skill's output contract already requires them.
Prerequisites
- Hard: Parent context from
research/_working/preliminary-competitive-analysis-research.mdor product-path equivalent. If absent, readresearch/icp.mdor product-path equivalent plus repo context; if neither exists, tell the user to run$competitive-analysisfirst and stop. - Soft: Existing competitive framework outputs, landing pages, pricing pages, review sites, product docs, customer feedback, and source files.
Product-Path Scope Resolution
Use the parent competitive-analysis product-path scope when present. Otherwise resolve scope from research/.progress.yaml and active non-archived paths before writing under research/{slug}/.
Process
- Load seeded competitors and use web search to find direct, indirect, incumbent, emerging, and DIY alternatives.
- Collect visible pricing, packaging, feature, integration, platform, target segment, and proof-point evidence.
- Build a comparison matrix that separates observed facts from inferred gaps.
- Identify pricing gaps, packaging trade-offs, missing capabilities, over-served features, and proof-point patterns.
- Flag unavailable pricing or gated sales pages as evidence gaps rather than guessing.
- Present findings before writing and incorporate factual corrections.
Output
research/competitive-analysis-feature-pricing-matrix.md (or research/{slug}/competitive-analysis-feature-pricing-matrix.md)
# Feature And Pricing Matrix
> Based on: [parent context, sources]
> Date: [current date]
> Methodology: Feature/Pricing Matrix
## Competitor Matrix
| Competitor | Segment | Core Features | Integrations | Pricing Model | Public Price | Proof Points | Evidence |
|------------|---------|---------------|--------------|---------------|--------------|--------------|----------|
## Gaps And Patterns
| Pattern | Evidence | Opportunity/Risk | Confidence |
|---------|----------|------------------|------------|
## Source Gaps
| Competitor | Missing Evidence | Why It Matters | Follow-up Query |
|------------|------------------|----------------|-----------------|
## Evidence Matrix
| Claim | Source | Evidence Type | Confidence |
|-------|--------|---------------|------------|
Constraints
- Never invent pricing. Use
not public,sales-gated, ornot foundwhen needed. - Keep GTM observations factual; strategy belongs to
$gtm. - This is a sub-skill; do not emit downstream routing labels or command recommendations.
Interrogation Page
Follow the shared interrogation-page convention via the packaged convention resolver; output path is interrogation/feature-pricing-matrix-r{N}-{branch}.html. Before producing research, run the stage-zero interrogation loop, starting with the assumptions manifest as round 1, and loop until the confidence gate passes. This skill cannot advance to stage one until the confidence gate passes with at least one completed interrogation round and every interview area covered or waived. Each round page must contain at least one genuinely open input (data-open-input).
Alignment Page
Follow the shared alignment-page convention via the packaged convention resolver; output path is alignment/feature-pricing-matrix-{topic}.html.
Default Shipping Contract
Follow the shared shipping contract convention in CLAUDE.md.