본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

programmatic-seo-spy

Reverse-engineer how competitors do programmatic SEO. Detects URL pattern clusters (vs/, integrations/, for-{industry}/), estimates page count per pattern, analyzes template quality, infers which patterns actually drive traffic, and identifies gaps you can exploit. Outputs a competitive pSEO landscape report.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(2)

  • SKILL.md11.6 KB
  • skill.meta.json338 B

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Programmatic SEO Competitor Spy

Before building your own programmatic SEO pages, know what your competitors are already doing. This skill crawls competitor sitemaps, detects which URL patterns are programmatic, estimates which ones actually drive traffic, assesses template quality, and finds the gaps they're missing.

Core principle: The best pSEO strategy starts with competitive intelligence. If 3 competitors have /vs/ pages and none have /for-{industry}/ pages, that's a signal. This skill turns competitor site structures into strategic intelligence.

When to Use

  • "What programmatic SEO are competitors doing?"
  • "Reverse-engineer competitor SEO pages"
  • "Which pSEO patterns actually work in our space?"
  • "Find pSEO gaps our competitors are missing"
  • "Analyze competitor URL structure for SEO patterns"

Tool Enhancement (Optional)

This skill works with existing capabilities but is dramatically better with domain analytics data that shows actual traffic per URL pattern.

Agent Prompt to User

"I can analyze competitor site structures with our existing crawling tools. For the most accurate results — especially knowing which patterns actually drive traffic vs. just existing — I'd recommend connecting a domain analytics API."

Recommended: DataForSEO (pay-per-use, ~$0.02-0.05 per domain analysis)

  • Sign up at dataforseo.com → get API login + password
  • Set DATAFORSEO_LOGIN and DATAFORSEO_PASSWORD env vars

Alternatives that also work:

  • SEMrush API (if you have a subscription) → set SEMRUSH_API_KEY
  • Ahrefs API (if you have a subscription) → set AHREFS_API_TOKEN
  • SimilarWeb API (if you have access) → set SIMILARWEB_API_KEY

"Want to use one of these, or should I proceed with baseline mode? Baseline will detect patterns and assess template quality, but traffic estimates will be inferred rather than measured."

Mode Selection

  • Enhanced mode — Domain analytics API provides organic keywords and estimated traffic per URL. Enables confident "this pattern drives X traffic" conclusions. Can show which specific pages within a pattern rank well.
  • Baseline mode — Uses site-content-catalog for URL crawling, seo-domain-analyzer for domain-level metrics, web_search for spot-checking rankings. Pattern detection is equally good. Traffic attribution is directional, based on page count × domain authority × keyword indicators.

Phase 0: Intake

  1. Competitors — 1-5 competitor URLs to analyze
  2. Your product URL — So we can compare coverage
  3. Category — What market/category are these competitors in?
  4. Specific interest? — Looking for anything specific (vs/ pages, integrations, etc.) or full analysis?
  5. Tool preference — Enhanced mode with domain analytics API, or baseline? (see Tool Enhancement above)

Phase 1: Sitemap Crawl

For each competitor, run site-content-catalog:

python3 skills/site-content-catalog/scripts/catalog_content.py \
  --url "<competitor_url>" \
  --output json

Collect:

  • All URLs from sitemap and internal crawl
  • Page titles
  • URL structure/hierarchy
  • Last modified dates (if available)

Phase 2: Pattern Detection

2A: URL Clustering

Group URLs by structural patterns using regex matching:

Pattern RegexExample URLsCategory
/vs/.* or /compare/.*/vs/competitor-a, /vs/competitor-bComparison
/integrations?/.*/integrations/slack, /integrations/hubspotIntegration
/for-.* or /solutions/.*/for-startups, /for-enterpriseVertical
/use-cases?/.*/use-cases/project-managementUse case
/alternatives?(-to)?/.*/alternatives/competitor-aAlternatives
/templates?/.* or /examples?/.*/templates/invoice, /templates/proposalTemplates
/glossary/.* or /what-is/.*/glossary/term-a, /what-is/crmGlossary
/tools?/.* or `/calculat(ore)/.*`/tools/roi-calculator
/blog/.* (exclude from pSEO)/blog/how-to-xEditorial (not pSEO)

For each detected pattern:

  • Page count — How many pages follow this pattern?
  • Data axis — What varies per page? (competitor name, tool name, industry, etc.)
  • URL consistency — Are URLs cleanly structured or messy?
  • Coverage completeness — Have they covered the obvious variations?

2B: Programmatic vs. Editorial Classification

Not every URL pattern is programmatic. Classify each cluster:

  • Programmatic — Clearly templated: consistent URL structure, similar page titles following a pattern, high page count, structured content
  • Semi-programmatic — Template with heavy manual customization
  • Editorial — Individually written, no template pattern
  • Auto-generated — Thin/low-quality programmatic (tag pages, archive pages)

Focus analysis on Programmatic and Semi-programmatic clusters only.

Phase 3: Traffic & Performance Analysis

Enhanced Mode (DataForSEO / SEMrush / Ahrefs)

For each competitor domain, pull organic keywords data:

# DataForSEO example
POST /v3/dataforseo_labs/google/ranked_keywords/live
{
  "target": "competitor.com",
  "filters": [
    ["ranked_serp_element.serp_item.url", "contains", "/vs/"]
  ]
}

Per pattern cluster:

  • Total ranking keywords across all pages in the pattern
  • Estimated monthly organic traffic to the pattern
  • Average ranking position for pages in this pattern
  • Top-performing pages within the pattern (which variations rank best?)
  • Keyword difficulty distribution (are they targeting easy or hard keywords?)

Baseline Mode

Estimate traffic indicators:

  • Run seo-domain-analyzer for overall domain metrics
  • Spot-check 3-5 pages per pattern via web_search — do they appear in top 10?
  • Check if pages are indexed (site:competitor.com/vs/)
  • Infer relative traffic: pattern page count × indexation rate × domain authority proxy
  • Note: these are directional estimates, not exact numbers

Phase 4: Template Quality Assessment

For each programmatic pattern, fetch 3-5 sample pages via fetch_webpage:

# Pick pages from the pattern — one high-variation, one low-variation, one middle

Evaluate template quality on:

DimensionScore 1-5What to Look For
Content depthWord count, sections, detail level
Unique value per pageDoes each page offer something you can't get from the template alone?
Data richnessTables, comparisons, stats, screenshots
Freshness signalsUpdated dates, current pricing, recent reviews
Internal linkingLinks to related pages, hub structure
CTA integrationContextual CTAs vs. generic banners
Schema markupStructured data, FAQ schema, review schema

Quality tiers:

  • 4-5 avg: Well-executed pSEO — hard to beat without significant differentiation
  • 3-4 avg: Decent but improvable — opportunity to out-template them
  • 1-3 avg: Thin/low-quality — easy to dominate with better content

Phase 5: Gap Analysis

5A: Pattern Coverage Matrix

Pattern TypeCompetitor ACompetitor BCompetitor CYouGap?
vs/ comparisons25 pages ★★★★10 pages ★★★00✓ A leads
integrations/40 pages ★★★60 pages ★★★★20 pages ★★0✓ B leads
for-{industry}/008 pages ★★0✓ Wide open
alternatives/5 pages ★★★000✓ Lightly competed
glossary/100 pages ★★050 pages ★★★0⚠️ Volume play

5B: Variation Gaps

Within each pattern competitors use, find missing variations:

  • Competitors they haven't written vs/ pages for
  • Integrations they support but haven't built pages for
  • Industries they serve but haven't targeted
  • These are your quick-win entries

5C: Pattern White Space

Entire pattern types no competitor has built:

  • Highest opportunity — no one to outrank, first-mover advantage
  • Validate search demand exists (Phase 1D of programmatic-seo-planner)

5D: Quality Gaps

Patterns where competitors have pages but they're low quality:

  • Thin content (< 500 words, no unique data)
  • Outdated (old screenshots, wrong pricing)
  • Missing schema markup
  • No visual differentiation between pages
  • These are "out-template" opportunities

Phase 6: Output

# Programmatic SEO Competitive Landscape — [Category] — [DATE]

## Competitors Analyzed
- [Competitor A] — [domain metrics, total pages crawled]
- [Competitor B] — [domain metrics, total pages crawled]
- [Competitor C] — [domain metrics, total pages crawled]

## Executive Summary
- [N] programmatic patterns detected across [M] competitors
- Strongest competitor pSEO: [Competitor X] with [pattern] ([N] pages, [quality])
- Biggest opportunity: [pattern type] — [reasoning]
- Quick wins: [N] variation gaps in existing competitor patterns

---

## Pattern-by-Pattern Analysis

### Pattern: [vs/ Comparisons]
**Who's doing it:** [Competitor A (25 pages, ★★★★), Competitor B (10 pages, ★★★)]
**Traffic estimate:** [X monthly visits across pattern] (enhanced) / [directional estimate] (baseline)
**Template quality:** [summary of strengths/weaknesses]
**Top-performing pages:** [specific pages that rank well]
**Variation gaps:** [competitors/variations they're missing]
**Your opportunity:** [specific recommendation]

### Pattern: [integrations/]
...

---

## Opportunity Ranking

| Priority | Pattern | Opportunity Type | Effort | Expected Impact |
|----------|---------|-----------------|--------|----------------|
| P0 | [pattern] | White space — no competitors | Medium | High |
| P0 | [pattern] | Quality gap — beat weak templates | Low | Medium |
| P1 | [pattern] | Variation gap — fill missing pages | Low | Medium |
| P2 | [pattern] | Head-to-head — outrank strong competitor | High | High |

---

## Recommended Action Plan

1. **Immediate (Week 1-2):** Build [pattern] — [rationale]
2. **Short-term (Month 1):** Build [pattern] — [rationale]
3. **Medium-term (Month 2-3):** Build [pattern] — [rationale]

---

## Raw Data
[Link to crawl data, pattern clusters, sample pages analyzed]

Save to the current working directory or wherever the user prefers.

Cost

ComponentCost
Site catalog per competitor (Apify)~$0.05-0.10
SEO domain analyzer per competitor~$0.10-0.20
Page fetches (3-5 per pattern × N patterns)~$0.01-0.05
DataForSEO domain analytics (enhanced)~$0.10-0.50 per competitor
AnalysisFree (LLM reasoning)
Total (baseline, 3 competitors)~$0.50-1.00
Total (enhanced, 3 competitors)~$0.80-2.00

Tools Required

  • Apify API token — APIFY_API_TOKEN env var
  • Upstream skills: site-content-catalog, seo-domain-analyzer, fetch_webpage
  • Optional (enhanced): DataForSEO (DATAFORSEO_LOGIN + DATAFORSEO_PASSWORD), SEMrush (SEMRUSH_API_KEY), Ahrefs (AHREFS_API_TOKEN), or SimilarWeb (SIMILARWEB_API_KEY)

Trigger Phrases

  • "What pSEO are competitors doing?"
  • "Reverse-engineer competitor programmatic pages"
  • "Analyze competitor URL structure"
  • "Find pSEO gaps in our space"
  • "What comparison pages do competitors have?"

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Research supported advertising promises from a specific buyer's context, current product facts, customer language and observed ads. Turn them into static, video or copy ideas; match video ideas to actual recipes and save a product-scoped angle bank for write-video-ad-script. Product-led discovery can use verified facts without reviews. Reference persistence and reach are observations, not proof of performance.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

gooseworks-ai/goose-skills1.3천2026년 10월 24일 업데이트

Analyze ad campaign performance data (Google, Meta, LinkedIn) to identify what's working, what's wasting budget, and specific cut/scale/test recommendations. Runs statistical analysis, funnel diagnostics, and multi-channel budget reallocation with specific dollar-amount shift recommendations and scenario modeling.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

gooseworks-ai/goose-skills1.3천2026년 10월 24일 업데이트

For paid lead-gen and participant-recruitment ads, replaces vanity CPA with true CAC per qualified lead by joining ad-platform data with downstream funnel events, surfaces tracking gaps, and classifies every creative into Scale / Keep / Investigate / Cut.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

gooseworks-ai/goose-skills1.3천2026년 10월 24일 업데이트

The intake stage of a Meta ad harness. Researches the brand first, states what it assumes, and asks only what it cannot infer and what would change money, claims or legal exposure if guessed wrong — at most four questions a turn, in plain business language. Writes the brand's stable facts (ads/brand.md), the campaign brief, and a log of what was asked vs assumed. Use it when someone wants to run Meta ads and the brand's ad facts are not yet recorded.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

gooseworks-ai/goose-skills1.3천2026년 10월 24일 업데이트

Checks paid ads against the ad platform's rules (Meta, TikTok, Google, LinkedIn and others) and the brand's category rules: the copy, on-image or on-screen text, pictures and people. Rewrites what can be fixed honestly, adds the disclosures that are needed, and flags anything that needs a human or legal review, with one pass, fixed or flag line per ad and platform. Use alone when you already have the ad text or images and know where they will run; otherwise run the playbook for the job (e.g. make-static-ads, make-content, email-lifecycle).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

gooseworks-ai/goose-skills1.3천2026년 10월 24일 업데이트

Analyze the message match between your ads and landing pages. Checks if the promise in the ad copy carries through to the landing page headline, body, and CTA. Flags disconnects that kill conversion rates. Works with Google, Meta, and LinkedIn ads.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

gooseworks-ai/goose-skills1.3천2026년 10월 24일 업데이트

gooseworks-ai의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고