Competitive War Room

Run parallel competitor deep-dives and synthesize into positioning strategy, battle cards, and competitive intelligence. One researcher per competitor, working simultaneously.

Usage

/agent-teams:competitive-war-room "Notion, Coda, Slite"

/agent-teams:competitive-war-room "Vercel, Netlify, Cloudflare Pages, Railway"

Overview

This command spawns one market-researcher teammate per competitor. Each researcher does a deep-dive on their assigned competitor using WebSearch. The lead synthesizes individual deep-dives into:

Competitive positioning map
Differentiation opportunities
Competitive threats
Battle cards (one per competitor)
White space analysis

What you get:

Deep-dive on each competitor (strategy, strengths, weaknesses, pricing, sentiment)
Side-by-side comparison across competitive dimensions
Battle cards ready for sales or product decisions
Specific strategic recommendations

Competitors to Analyze

$ARGUMENTS

Instructions

Pre-Flight Check

Verify Agent Teams is available in your Claude Code version. If teammates cannot be spawned, display:

This command requires Claude Code's Agent Teams feature.
Check https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code for setup instructions.

If not available, stop.

Parse the competitor list from the "Competitors to Analyze" section above.
- Trim whitespace from each competitor name
- Validate at least 2 competitors provided
- If fewer than 2: "Please provide at least 2 competitors, separated by commas."
Load product context for positioning baseline:
- Read .claude/product-context/product-info.md if it exists
- Read .claude/product-context/competitive-landscape.md if it exists
- If no product-info.md, ask the user: "What's your product and who's it for? I need this to position you against competitors."

Phase 1: Mission Briefing

Define your product's positioning baseline from context files or user input.
Display briefing:

╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║   Competitive War Room                                     ║
╔═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝

Your Product: [product name and positioning from context]

Competitors to analyze:
  [1. Competitor 1]
  [2. Competitor 2]
  [3. Competitor 3]
  [... etc.]

Deploying [N] market researchers (one per competitor).
Each will deep-dive: strategy, strengths, weaknesses, pricing, sentiment.

Phase 1: Parallel Deep-Dives ([N] researchers working simultaneously)
Phase 2: Synthesis (positioning map, battle cards, recommendations)

Starting research...
╚═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝

Phase 2: Parallel Deep-Dives

Spawn N market-researcher teammates simultaneously, one per competitor.

For each competitor, spawn a market-researcher with:

Prompt: "Deep-dive competitor: [Competitor Name].

CONTEXT - YOUR PRODUCT:
[Product info from context or user input]

Your job: Become the expert on [Competitor Name]. Use WebSearch extensively
to research:

1. **Overview**: What they do, who they serve, how they position
2. **Strategy**: Their approach to the market, recent moves, direction
3. **Strengths**: What they do well (cite evidence from reviews, features)
4. **Weaknesses**: Where they fall short (cite evidence from reviews, complaints)
5. **Pricing**: Full pricing model with tiers (link to pricing page)
6. **Customer Sentiment**: What users love and hate (G2, Capterra, Reddit, etc.)
7. **Threat Level**: How much of a threat are they to [your product]?

Use the standard market-researcher competitive war room output format.
Cite every claim with a source URL and date.
Be thorough but focused. Quality over exhaustiveness."

Wait for all researchers to complete their deep-dives.

Phase 3: Synthesis

As the lead agent, compile all deep-dives into a competitive synthesis.

Read all individual competitor deep-dives.
Invoke the team-deliverables skill for the competitive synthesis template.
Build the positioning map:
- Map your product against each competitor across key dimensions
- Identify where you're stronger, where you're weaker
Identify differentiation opportunities:
- Where you win: Advantages to exploit
- Where you lose: Weaknesses to mitigate or avoid
- White space: Needs no competitor addresses well
Assess competitive threats:
- Likelihood and impact of each threat
- Recommended response for each
Generate battle cards:
- One per competitor using the battle card section of the template
- Include: their pitch, your counter, where you win, where they win, landmines, killer question
Develop strategic recommendations:
- Positioning refinements based on competitive landscape
- Feature priorities informed by competitive gaps
- Messaging adjustments to highlight differentiation
Present the completed competitive synthesis to the user.

Phase 4: Battle Cards

After presenting the synthesis, generate a standalone battle card for each competitor.

Each battle card should be concise (under 1 page) and actionable:

When you encounter this competitor
Their pitch vs. your counter
Your advantages and their advantages (be honest)
Topics to avoid (their strengths you can't match)
One killer question that shifts the conversation in your favor

Phase 5: Cleanup

Shut down all researcher teammates.
Offer to save:

Competitive war room complete.

Would you like me to save these findings?

  1. Full report → .claude/product-context/competitive-landscape.md
  2. Battle cards → .claude/product-context/battle-cards/[competitor].md

Saving makes this available to other PM agents (product-strategist,
launch-planner, feature-prioritizer) for future reference.

If user accepts:
- Save competitive landscape to .claude/product-context/competitive-landscape.md
- Save individual battle cards to .claude/product-context/battle-cards/ directory
- Include "Last Updated: [date]" header in each file
If declined, done.

Error Handling

If a researcher fails on a specific competitor, note the gap in the synthesis and proceed with available deep-dives.
If WebSearch is unavailable, note that data will be limited and work with available information.
If a competitor name is ambiguous (multiple companies with similar names), the researcher should clarify which one based on the product context.
If more than 5 competitors provided, warn the user that quality may decrease with too many parallel researchers, but proceed.

/agent-teams:validation-sprint - Validate your idea against the competitive landscape
/agent-teams:prd-stress-test - Stress-test a PRD with competitive context
market-analyst agent - For focused competitive research on a single competitor
product-strategist agent - For positioning strategy based on competitive findings

competitive-war-room