name: comparison-page description: "Create or update objective website comparison pages and head-to-head pages from the comparison canon. Use for SlayZone vs competitor pages with quick verdict, last-checked freshness, top-of-page side-by-side screenshots, pick-X-if blocks, balanced strengths/weaknesses for both products, an at-a-glance feature table, and a full matrix below." trigger: auto
Create or update objective public comparison pages.
Use this skill when task is to build, revise, or refresh a website comparison page or head-to-head page such as SlayZone vs Superset.sh.
Load First
- Read
comparison/COMPETITOR_GUIDE.md. - Read relevant canonical competitor folder in
comparison/<slug>/. - Read current website comparison implementation in
website/src/pages/andwebsite/src/components/comparison/. - Read existing SlayZone website copy for claims that need to be stated about SlayZone.
Only use comparison/_legacy/ if canonical record does not exist and user explicitly accepts stopgap output.
Non-Negotiables
- page is comparison, not sales page
- treat both products as capable tools with real tradeoffs
- always name strengths and weaknesses of both sides
- never assume SlayZone wins every axis
- if competitor is stronger on an axis, say so plainly
- if SlayZone is weaker or unclear, say so plainly
- use structured canon fields for table truth
- do not invent facts from prose vibes
- if evidence is weak, say
unknown, lower confidence, or surface gap
Required Page Structure
Build page in this order unless user explicitly overrides:
- Title card with:
- page title
- side-by-side screenshots at top: one SlayZone, one competitor
Last checkedfreshness near top- quick verdict
Pick SlayZone if...andPick <competitor> if...- One section per product:
- what it is
- core strengths
- core weaknesses
- At-a-glance table:
- short, high-signal subset of rows
- include jump link to full matrix if page supports anchor links
- Full matrix table:
- broader axis coverage
- same truth source as at-a-glance table
Do not create separate mid-page "visual proof" section. Visual comparison belongs at top.
Writing Rules
- quick verdict must be balanced, short, evidence-backed
- avoid loaded winner language like "obliterates", "crushes", "obviously better"
- prefer "best if", "stronger when", "weaker on", "better fit for"
- keep product descriptions symmetrical in ambition and scrutiny
- do not hide ugly facts for either side
- call out architectural differences, not only feature checklist differences
- distinguish:
- verified facts
- structured axis verdicts
- editorial recommendation
Visual Rules
- top visuals must compare like-with-like as much as possible
- give both screenshots similar weight and framing
- captions should clarify what each screenshot demonstrates
- visuals support orientation; they do not carry factual burden alone
- if one side lacks a good screenshot, say so and avoid fake symmetry
Freshness Rules
- always show
Last checked - if page depends on multiple freshness dates, do not collapse them into misleading single date
- prefer:
- one date if both sides were checked together
- two explicit dates if freshness differs materially
- if canon is stale, surface that before publishing confident claims
Table Rules
- at-a-glance table = decisive subset of full matrix, not separate truth
- full matrix rows must map to explicit structured axes or equally explicit website-side constants
- use consistent verdict vocabulary across page
- row labels should be concrete and comparable
- notes should explain why row matters, not repeat product marketing
- if two products are both strong on row, show that; do not force artificial differentiation
Workflow
- Read competitor canon and current website implementation.
- Build fact baseline for both products.
- Pick 5-8 decisive rows for at-a-glance table.
- Build full matrix from structured axes.
- Draft balanced quick verdict.
- Draft
Pick X if...blocks from fit, not hype. - Write one neutral strengths/weaknesses section per product.
- Place screenshots in hero/title card.
- Verify tables, freshness labels, and verdict language stay consistent.
- Build/test page on desktop and mobile.
Stop Conditions
Pause and call out gap when:
- competitor canon is stale or missing key axes
- SlayZone claim is not grounded in current site/product truth
- screenshots are missing for one side and user has not approved asymmetric fallback
- quick verdict starts sounding like ad copy
- at-a-glance rows disagree with full matrix truth
Output Goal
Ship page that helps reader decide which product fits them.
Reader should leave understanding:
- what each product is for
- where each product is stronger
- where each product is weaker
- which one fits their workflow better