Every product marketer and demand gen lead at a B2B SaaS company has the same problem: your competitive intelligence is out of date the moment you finish it.
Your software changes. Your competitors' software changes. Someone on your sales team is still citing a feature gap that your competitor quietly filled six months ago. Your website is showing G2 stats from two years ago. A competitor has a live page specifically designed to steal your customers — and your LP doesn't address a single claim on it.
Nobody has time to run a full competitive audit more than once a quarter. And a quarterly cadence is already too slow.
I built a Claude skill to fix this. It has two parts that solve two distinct problems.
What I Built
The skill has two major capabilities: a Competitive Analysis Agent and an LP Freshness Audit.
The Competitive Analysis Agent answers "what do our competitors actually do, feature by feature, right now — and how do we position against each one?" The LP Freshness Audit answers "are the claims on our own LP still accurate, and what are we leaving on the table?"
Feature 1: Competitive Analysis Agent
It starts by building the full landscape
The skill auto-discovers your competitors — not just the ones you already know, but the full category map including adjacent tools and the status quo (email, PDFs, Slack) that you're also competing against. From a recent run for a B2B SaaS client, it surfaced 11 competitors and selected the 5 most relevant for deep analysis.
Before comparing features, it identifies which capabilities actually matter to buyers — by analyzing the language customers use in reviews, what prospects ask about in support forums, and what shows up in buying conversations. This matters because PMM teams typically define feature categories the way engineering built the product, not the way a prospect evaluates it.
Then agents crawl every source that matters
For each competitor, agents pull from three source types simultaneously:
- Marketing pages — what they're claiming to have
- Help centers and documentation — what they actually support, which often diverges from the marketing copy
- Review sites — what users say works, what they complain is missing, and how they compare you by name
The multi-source approach is the key distinction. Marketing pages are optimistic. A competitor might claim a feature prominently that their documentation makes clear is only available on Enterprise, or significantly more limited in practice than the marketing implies. Reviews surface what real users experience. The agent cross-references all three and notes the delta.
The output
The analysis produces:
A feature comparison table — features and categories are determined by what the research surfaces as most important to buyers in your category. Each cell gets a Yes / No / Some / Unknown rating for every product. Color-coded, exportable as CSV.
An annotated version of the same table — not just checkmarks, but a note on every cell explaining why it got that rating, with source attribution. So "No" for a competitor's audit trail doesn't just sit there — it says "Explicitly confirmed gap — no built-in audit trail or reporting."
A software evaluation layer — G2 ratings, pricing, free plan and trial structures, funding, headcount, and ARR signals, so you know the market context around each competitor, not just their feature list.
A competitive positioning playbook — for each competitor: where you win, where they win, the counter-narrative, what to lead with, and what to watch out for. Formatted as a table for quick reference in sales prep.
Copy-ready VS page drafts — a full landing page brief for each head-to-head competitor. URL, title tag, meta description, H1, comparison table, "where we stand out" section, "who should choose which" section, customer proof framing, and CTA block. Ready to hand to a designer.
A "Steal This" report — named tactics identified from competitor landing pages, each with a "Why it works" and "How to adapt it" section. The kind of research that usually gets buried in a slide deck and forgotten.
Competitive Analysis Agent
Identify Buyer-Defined Features
Pulled from G2, Capterra, reviews — ranked by buying conversation frequency
Competitors Discovered
Auto-identified from review sites, category pages, and market context
Agents Crawl All Sources
Marketing pages · help centers · review sites — simultaneously
Feature Matrix Built
Who has what — marketing claims vs. documentation vs. user reviews
Tables + Talking Points
Per-competitor breakdowns and sales-ready language
Marketing claims cross-referenced against docs and reviews — not just what competitors say, but what they actually deliver
nicklanspa.comFeature 2: LP Freshness Audit
What it actually does
You upload your own landing pages — each competitive alternative or VS page you have live. The skill reads every factual claim on each one and returns a verdict: Accurate, Outdated, Wrong, Risky, or Unverifiable.
It leads with legal exposure. Claims that are factually false about a competitor — not outdated, not debatable, but demonstrably wrong — get flagged first, before anything else in the report.
What a real run looks like
A recent audit on a competitive alternative page returned a mix of accurate claims, outdated ones, a factually wrong statement about a competitor feature, a legally risky superlative, and a handful of unverifiable claims — plus a set of offensive plays the page wasn't making at all.
For each issue, the report delivers: the location on the page, the current text block-quoted, what's wrong and why, and a suggested rewrite — specific copy you can paste into a revision brief.
It also covers offense
The audit doesn't just identify what to fix. It surfaces what you're not claiming that you should be.
In the same run, the 12 offensive plays included a logo wall callout the LP wasn't using (Fortune 100 logos with a named stat), a file format breadth claim that was significantly stronger than the competitor's, an uptime SLA that the competitor didn't publish, a G2 review volume advantage that the LP was framing in a way that visually lost the comparison, and several customer ROI stats that existed internally but weren't on the page.
The report also pulls the competitor's own live attack page — if they have a /alternatives/your-brand or /vs/your-brand page — and surfaces every specific claim they're making, with counter-language for each one.
The cadence it's designed for
The skill is built to be run on a schedule: quarterly at minimum, within a week of any major competitor release, before any paid traffic push to the page, and after your own major product releases. The output is dated so you can compare runs over time.
Why This Problem Is Worse Than Most Teams Realize
The manual version of this work requires someone who knows the product deeply, understands how buyers evaluate it, can read between the lines of competitor marketing copy, and has the time to synthesize all of it into something a designer and copywriter can act on. That person is usually the most overloaded person on the PMM team.
So it doesn't get done on a meaningful cadence. It gets done when something goes wrong — a deal lost to a specific competitor, a sales rep who got caught citing a feature gap that no longer exists, a prospect who shows up to a call clearly briefed by the competition.
By then you're playing catch-up. The skill makes it cheap enough to stay ahead.
If you're a product marketer or demand gen lead at a B2B SaaS company, reach out if you want to talk through what this workflow would look like for your product and competitive set.