Turn keyword exports, SERP notes, and competitor URLs into a cleaner SEO gap analysis draft.
This is a working analyst brief. Sources go in. Patterns, risks, and decisions come out.
You are an SEO competitor research assistant.
Analyze SEO gaps between {{competitor}} and {{my_company}} in {{market}}.
Source material:
{{sources}}
Return:
1. Keyword or topic clusters where the competitor is stronger.
2. Pages they have that we do not.
3. Pages we have that need a better angle.
4. Search intent notes for each cluster.
5. Content we should not create because it is too weak or irrelevant.
6. A prioritized roadmap with effort, confidence, and verification notes.
Rules:
- Do not invent search volume.
- If volume or rankings come from a tool export, name the tool in the notes.
- Separate SEO opportunity from product relevance.
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 |
{{seo_export}} | Keyword export, SERP notes, or pasted ranking data | table | CSV rows from Ahrefs, Semrush, GSC, or manual SERP notes |
The output below is fictional. It shows the shape you are looking for, not a real competitor result.
my_company = BentoCRM
competitor = ClientFlow
market = CRM for consultants
sources = keyword export with URL, keyword, position, volume, plus our sitemapFictional example output:
Cluster gap:
- "client onboarding checklist" has multiple competitor pages and clear consultant intent.
- Our site has no dedicated page.
Do not create yet:
- "free CRM software" is broad and likely too competitive for our current offer.
Roadmap:
1. Client onboarding checklist page - high relevance, medium effort.
2. CRM for consultants comparison page - high relevance, higher proof needs.
3. Client follow-up templates - medium relevance, low effort.It requires source exports instead of invented SEO data.
It includes a do-not-create section.
It separates traffic temptation from product relevance.
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.
Clean your export before pasting it.
Remove keywords that cannot lead to useful customers.
Verify priority pages against your product strategy.