comparison_page_craft v1.0.0

name: "comparison_page_craft" description: "Write honest, high-ranking comparison and alternatives pages ('X vs Y', 'X alternatives'): buyer-weighted dimensions, SEO page structure, FTC-safe claims and disclosures, plus fill-in page templates and a worked example. Triggers when drafting competitor comparison pages, alternatives roundups, or comparison landing pages."

Comparison Page Craft

Purpose

Ship comparison and alternatives pages that rank, get cited by AI answers, and actually convert: honest pages where someone who ends up choosing the competitor would still find the page useful.

Workflow

1. Name the question. One comparison per page. "Should I use [You] or [Competitor]?" or "What are the best alternatives to [Competitor]?" Different questions need different pages and different structures (see templates).
2. Research from primary sources only. Pull every fact about the other product from their pricing page, docs, or changelog. Save each claim's source URL and the date you read it. Prices and features change; a stale comparison is a liability.
3. Pick dimensions the buyer weighs. Use the dimensions the top three buyer questions point to (cost at scale, deployment model, migration effort, whatever yours are), not the dimensions you win.
4. Draft from the matching template in references/ (alternatives hub or one-on-one vs page).
5. Run the honesty pass. For each check that fails, fix the page before shipping:

• Would a reader who picks the competitor still call the page useful?
• Did you concede at least two dimensions outright, with no recovery clause?
• Are competitor strengths named in plain language?
• Is every factual claim sourced and dated?
• Is the page dated, with a re-verification schedule (quarterly at minimum)?
• Is there an explicit scope boundary (situations this comparison does not cover)?

1. Run the disclosure pass. Add affiliate/material-connection disclosures where the recommendation appears, in plain language. Check every superlative against the FTC rules below.
2. Ship with maintenance. Put the page on a re-verification calendar. Competitor facts change and the page silently rots otherwise.

Output Contract

Every page ships with:

• H1 that is the buyer's actual question ("Acme vs Globex: which fits a 50-person team?"), not a clever headline.
• Answer-first TL;DR above the fold: 2 to 8 lines, who it is for, the verdict, the decision shortcut. This is what featured snippets and AI answers lift.
• HTML comparison table, placed early, with descriptive cells ("Full support with unlimited history" vs "Basic support, 90-day limit"), never just checkmarks. A takeaway paragraph + structured table + per-metric source attribution is the most citation-stable format.
• "Who should choose what" section that recommends your product only for the use cases you are best at.
• Honest alternatives (for alternatives pages): 4 to 7 genuine options, each with a "best for" label, strengths, weaknesses, pricing snapshot, and ideal user. Your product does not have to be first. A page listing only your product fails quality.
• FAQ using the buyers' real wording ("Can I migrate from X?"), with the direct answer in the first sentence.
• Visible date and sources ("Last verified: 2026-10-09", links to each competitor's pricing/docs page).

Operating Rules

1. No fake wins. 28 green checkmarks for you and zero for a known category leader reads as manipulation. Prospects have killed deals over disingenuous comparison pages.
2. Concede without a clawback. "For teams that need X, the other option is a better fit." A concession followed by a paragraph explaining why it does not really matter is worse than no concession.
3. One factual error about a competitor costs more than the page. A wrong price or missing feature handed to their sales team is a gift to them. Source from their site, not second-hand summaries.
4. Superlatives need substantiation. Before launch, have a reasonable basis for every objective claim, express or implied. "Best" needs stated criteria. "Cheaper" needs a named tier and an as-of date. You cannot generate substantiation after the claim is live.
5. Price claims must be real. Former or strike-through prices count only if the product was openly offered at that price in good faith for a substantial recent period. Competitor price references must reflect prevailing market prices, not outliers. (FTC Guides Against Deceptive Pricing, 16 C.F.R. Part 233.)
6. Disclose material connections where the recommendation appears. Affiliate links, commissions, free products, paid placements, employment ties: say so in plain language ("I get commissions for purchases made through links in this post"), next to the link or recommendation, not buried in a footer. A paid ranking boost presented as an objective ranking is deceptive even if you never claim to be unbiased. (FTC Endorsement Guides, revised July 2023.)
7. Never trash the competition. Name their strengths honestly. If they publish false claims about you, disprove those specific claims with truths and take the high ground.
8. One pairing per page. A page covering you against six competitors serves none of the queries well and reads as a directory.
9. Build from frustration, not ego. The strongest differentiation comes from real switch reasons: sales call recordings, churn interviews, support tickets, "why we switched" reviews. A competitor's real gap is usually an expensive experience, not a missing checkbox.
10. Write plain. No em dashes, no stacked superlatives, no motivational filler. If a sentence sounds like a press release, rewrite it.