cadence-voice:analyzing-competitors

User Input

$ARGUMENTS

You MUST have a GitHub URL in the arguments to proceed.

Competitor Analysis Workflow

The text after /analyzing-competitors should be a GitHub repository URL. Parse it and execute the following workflow:

Step 1: Parse & Validate Input

1. Extract the GitHub URL from $ARGUMENTS
2. Validate it's a valid GitHub URL (e.g., https://github.com/owner/repo)
3. Extract owner and repo from the URL
4. If no valid URL found: ERROR "Please provide a GitHub repository URL"

Step 2: Gather Intelligence

Use the market-researcher agent or direct tools to collect information in parallel:

From GitHub (use gh CLI):

# Basic repo info
gh repo view owner/repo --json name,description,stargazerCount,forkCount,updatedAt,licenseInfo,primaryLanguage,languages,repositoryTopics,homepageUrl

# Recent activity
gh repo view owner/repo --json pushedAt,createdAt,defaultBranchRef

# Contributors count
gh api repos/owner/repo/contributors --paginate -q 'length'

From Repository Content (use WebFetch on raw.githubusercontent.com):

• README.md - Overview and features
• package.json / Cargo.toml / pyproject.toml - Dependencies and tech stack
• Look for: docs/, ARCHITECTURE.md, CONTRIBUTING.md

From Web (if has homepage):

• Fetch homepage for marketing claims
• Check for documentation site

Step 3: Analyze & Categorize

Based on gathered info, determine:

1. What it is: One-sentence description

2. Type Classification:

   • orchestrator - Multi-agent coordination
   • toolkit - Prompt/agent templates
   • monitor - Session/usage tracking
   • integration - External service connection
   • config - Configuration management
   • utility - Developer tools
   • alternative - Direct replacement/competitor

3. Threat Level:

   • Red HIGH - Direct competitor with significant traction (>5k stars, similar features)
   • Yellow MEDIUM - Partial overlap or emerging threat (1k-5k stars)
   • Green LOW - Complementary tool or niche solution (<1k stars)

4. Key Features: Extract 5-10 main capabilities

5. Technical Architecture:

   • Language/framework
   • Architecture pattern (client-server, CLI, desktop, etc.)
   • Key dependencies

6. Our Relevance:

   • Features to potentially adopt
   • Weaknesses we can exploit
   • Gaps in their offering

Step 4: Create Analysis Document

Create docs/research/{repo-name}-analysis.md using this template:

# {Repo Name} Competitor Analysis

**Date:** {TODAY} · **Repository:** {GitHub URL} · **License:** {License}
**Stars:** {Stars} · **Forks:** {Forks} · **Contributors:** {Count}
**Tech Stack:** {Primary language and key dependencies} · **Status:** {Active/Inactive}

---

## Executive Summary

{2-3 sentence overview of what this tool does and why it matters}

**Threat Level:** {HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW} - {One sentence justification}

**Type:** {orchestrator/toolkit/monitor/integration/config/utility/alternative}

---

## What It Does

{Detailed description of functionality - 3-5 paragraphs}

---

## Technical Architecture

{Architecture diagram if complex, otherwise describe the structure}

### Tech Stack

| Component | Technology |
|-----------|------------|
| Language | {Primary language} |
| Framework | {Key frameworks} |
| Dependencies | {Notable deps} |

### Key Files/Structure

| Path | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| {path} | {purpose} |

---

## Key Features

| Feature | Description |
|---------|-------------|
| {Feature 1} | {Description} |
| {Feature 2} | {Description} |
...

---

## Installation & Usage

\```bash
{Installation commands}
\```

{Brief usage example}

---

## Strengths

1. {Strength 1}
2. {Strength 2}
...

---

## Weaknesses

1. {Weakness 1}
2. {Weakness 2}
...

---

## Gap Analysis: Our Opportunities

| Capability | {Repo} | Our Opportunity |
|------------|--------|-----------------|
| {Feature} | {Yes/No/Partial} | {Opportunity} |
...

---

## Features Worth Stealing

| Feature | Effort | Impact | Priority |
|---------|--------|--------|----------|
| {Feature} | {Low/Medium/High} | {Description} | {High/Medium/Low} |
...

---

## Strategic Assessment

### Threat Level: {HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW}

{2-3 paragraphs on competitive positioning}

### Our Differentiation

{How we differ and should position against this competitor}

### Recommended Actions

1. **Immediate:** {Action}
2. **Short-term:** {Action}
3. **Medium-term:** {Action}

---

## References

- [GitHub Repository]({URL})
- {Other relevant links}

---

**Last Updated:** {TODAY}

Step 5: Update Competitive Landscape

Read docs/research/competitive-landscape.md and update it:

1. Add to Threat Matrix if HIGH or MEDIUM threat
2. Add to Top Competitors section if HIGH threat
3. Update Feature Landscape tables if it introduces new patterns
4. Add to "Ideas Worth Stealing" section with extracted features
5. Update Documentation Index at bottom

Step 6: Report Completion

Output a summary:

## Competitor Analysis Complete

### {Repo Name}

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Type | {type} |
| Threat Level | {threat} |
| Stars | {stars} |
| Key Insight | {one sentence} |

### Documents Updated

- Created: `docs/research/{repo-name}-analysis.md`
- Updated: `docs/research/competitive-landscape.md`

### Features to Consider

1. {Top feature 1}
2. {Top feature 2}
3. {Top feature 3}

### Next Steps

- Review the full analysis at `docs/research/{repo-name}-analysis.md`
- Consider adding to roadmap: {key feature}

Guidelines

Research Depth

• HIGH threat: Deep dive - architecture, code review, community analysis
• MEDIUM threat: Standard analysis - features, tech stack, gaps
• LOW threat: Quick summary - description, threat assessment, skip detailed analysis

When Information is Unavailable

• Don't fabricate data - mark as "Unknown" or "Not available"
• Focus on what can be determined from public sources
• Note gaps in your analysis

Date Format

Use ISO format: YYYY-MM-DD

File Naming

• Lowercase
• Hyphens instead of spaces
• Suffix with -analysis.md
• Example: claude-squad-analysis.md