Turn competitor content and search exports into content gaps that are actually relevant to your product.
This is a working analyst brief. Sources go in. Patterns, risks, and decisions come out.
You are a product-led SEO strategist.
Find content gaps competitors cover and rank them by product relevance, not only traffic size.
My company:
{{my_company}}
Competitor:
{{competitor}}
Market:
{{market}}
Sources:
{{sources}}
Return:
1. Content gaps grouped by buyer problem.
2. Competitor examples for each gap.
3. Search intent and product fit.
4. Why some high-volume topics should be ignored.
5. Page brief for the top five opportunities.
6. Evidence and verification notes.
Rules:
- Use only the sources I provide.
- Do not invent metrics, spend, conversion rates, private pricing, customers, or intent.
- Mark unsupported claims as [UNVERIFIED].
- Separate observation, interpretation, and recommendation.
Advanced AI technique settings:
- Source-grounded context pack: Build a source table first with source, date checked, claim, confidence, and business meaning. Use only that table for the final recommendations.
- Tool-aware research plan: Before analysis, state which sources or tools should be checked, which facts each tool can verify, and which claims must stay manual.
- Cited answer-engine check: Run a cited search pass for current facts. Keep URLs, dates checked, and quoted claims separate from your own pasted evidence, then downgrade anything without a reliable source.
- Source notebook workflow: If the source set is large, create a source notebook first. Ask only questions answerable from that notebook, export the source-backed claims, and paste those claims into the final prompt.
- Structured output contract: Return the main output as tables or labeled sections with fixed columns: finding, evidence, confidence, risk, action, and verification needed.
- Evidence rubric: Score each important finding by evidence strength, relevance, business impact, and reversibility before recommending an action.
- Verification loop: After the first draft, run a verification pass that lists unsupported claims, stale details, missing sources, and recommendations to downgrade or remove.
- Effort routing: Choose the tool mode before analysis: source notebook for stable evidence, cited answer engine for current web facts, coding agent for file changes, autonomous agent for multi-step collection, and deeper reasoning for high-stakes synthesis.Copy the prompt. Fill the variables. Then check the output for real.
These are selected for this specific competitor research job. Use the prompt-ready instruction when it helps, and skip it when the condition does not fit.
Use when: Use when the answer depends on competitor pages, screenshots, ads, pricing, SEO exports, or reviews.
Prompt move: Build a source table first with source, date checked, claim, confidence, and business meaning. Use only that table for the final recommendations.
Skip when: Skip only for brainstorming with no factual claims.
Use when: Use with web-enabled research, source notebooks, coding agents, MCP tools, SEO tools, ad libraries, or APIs.
Prompt move: Before analysis, state which sources or tools should be checked, which facts each tool can verify, and which claims must stay manual.
Skip when: Skip when all evidence is already pasted and no tool access is needed.
Use when: Use when the prompt depends on current web facts, public pricing, recently changed pages, search results, product releases, or market claims.
Prompt move: Run a cited search pass for current facts. Keep URLs, dates checked, and quoted claims separate from your own pasted evidence, then downgrade anything without a reliable source.
Skip when: Skip when all evidence is private, pasted, or already date-stamped.
Use when: Use when you have a stable pack of competitor pages, PDFs, call notes, screenshots, exports, or long research notes.
Prompt move: If the source set is large, create a source notebook first. Ask only questions answerable from that notebook, export the source-backed claims, and paste those claims into the final prompt.
Skip when: Skip when you only have one or two short sources.
Use when: Use when the output must be compared, reviewed, or turned into tasks.
Prompt move: Return the main output as tables or labeled sections with fixed columns: finding, evidence, confidence, risk, action, and verification needed.
Skip when: Skip when the desired output is narrative copy.
Use when: Use when recommendations could change strategy, positioning, pricing, ads, or product priorities.
Prompt move: Score each important finding by evidence strength, relevance, business impact, and reversibility before recommending an action.
Skip when: Skip for prompts that only organize notes without recommending action.
Use when: Use before sharing research with a client, team, sales deck, ad brief, or website backlog.
Prompt move: After the first draft, run a verification pass that lists unsupported claims, stale details, missing sources, and recommendations to downgrade or remove.
Skip when: Skip only for private rough notes.
Use when: Use when deciding between normal chat, reasoning models, source notebooks, cited answer engines, coding agents, autonomous agents, open models, or a lightweight prompt.
Prompt move: Choose the tool mode before analysis: source notebook for stable evidence, cited answer engine for current web facts, coding agent for file changes, autonomous agent for multi-step collection, and deeper reasoning for high-stakes synthesis.
Skip when: Skip when the user already selected the tool or model.
| Variable | Meaning | Type | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
{{my_company}} | Your company, product, or brand | string | Northstar CRM |
{{competitor}} | The competitor you want to analyze | string | Acme CRM |
{{market}} | The category or market context | string | B2B CRM for agencies |
{{sources}} | URLs, screenshots, notes, exports, or pasted copy | list | Homepage URL, pricing URL, ad screenshots |
The output below is fictional. It shows the shape you are looking for, not a real competitor result.
my_company = HireLoop
competitor = StaffBoard
market = hiring workflow software
sources = Ahrefs export, competitor blog URLs, our product use casesFictional example output:
Top gap: interview scorecard template.
Product fit: high, because the product supports structured hiring.
Ignore: generic HR trends, because buyer intent is weak and the product fit is thin.
Brief: template page with workflow, example scorecard, and product CTA.It ranks gaps by product fit.
It makes the model explain what to ignore.
It turns research into page briefs.
Paste the page copy, ad screenshots, pricing table, SEO notes, or transcript first.
Use it as a source-backed brief: keep strong evidence, downgrade weak evidence, and decide what deserves action.
Ask for observations, risks, and next actions tied to the evidence.
Every factual claim has a source or is marked as unverified.
Pricing, dates, and product claims were checked on the original source.
The output separates observation from interpretation.
The output gives actions you can reject, edit, or test.
Nothing is treated as final just because an AI tool wrote it.
Filter exports before pasting them.
Choose gaps your product can actually satisfy.
Create briefs before drafting pages.