Creator · Affitor
Last updated · Sep 3, 2026
Write "X vs Y" comparison blog posts that help readers choose between two competing products. Triggers on: "write a comparison post", "X vs Y blog post", "compare [product A] and [product B]", "which is better [A] or [B]", "head to head comparison", "[product] vs [product] articl
Sandbox only
Install targets
Codex install prompt
Install the "comparison-post-writer" agent skill from https://github.com/Affitor/affiliate-skills/tree/main/skills/blog/comparison-post-writer. Read its SKILL.md or equivalent instructions first, install only the files needed for this workspace, and summarize any required setup before using it. Skill purpose: Write "X vs Y" comparison blog posts that help readers choose between two competing products. Triggers on: "write a comparison post", "X vs Y blog post", "compare [product A] and [product B]", "which is better [A] or [B]", "head to head comparison", "[product] vs [product] article", "comparison review", "write a versus article", "side by side comparison blog", "which should I choose [A] or [B]", "compare these two products for my blog". After the install attempt, report the result to https://www.openagentskill.com/api/agent/outcome with POST JSON {"event_id":"install_<unique-id>","skill_slug":"affitor-comparison-post-writer","task":"Install comparison-post-writer","agent":"codex","outcome":"success","install_used":true}. Replace event_id with a unique value and outcome with success or failed. Report success only after the skill is installed and a minimal verification passes.Supply asset profile
Deep research, source comparison, literature review, RAG, knowledge search, and reports.
Scenario
Research agents
I need my agent to research a topic, compare sources, and produce a concise report.
Agent fit
Claude Code + OpenAI Agents + Cursor
Codex, Claude Code, Cursor, CLI, or custom agents.
Install
Ready
npx skills add Affitor/affiliate-skills --skill comparison-post-writer
Maintenance
active
3mo since push
Risk
Needs review
Dependency or permission surface needs review
GitHub quality
639
73/100 Quality · 78/100 Trust
Coverage tags
Review notes
Dependency or permission surface needs review · Permission surface may require sandboxing
Agent adoption scorecard
These scores combine public repository metadata, OpenAgentSkill review signals, maintenance freshness, and install readiness. They are a shortlist signal, not a replacement for human review.
Quality
StrongSolid option that is likely worth shortlisting for production workflows.
Trust
Sandbox onlyUseful candidate with missing or mixed trust signals. Keep it in an isolated workspace until the outcome loop proves task fit.
Audit
Needs reviewA machine-readable review of install readiness, security metadata, maintenance, and adoption risk.
OpenAgentSkill Trust Score v5
Run only in a sandbox and compare close alternatives before using it for real work.
Stars
639 GitHub stars
Repo activity
639 stars, 199 forks
Maintenance
3mo since push
License
MIT
Install
npx skills add Affitor/affiliate-skills --skill comparison-post-writer
Install safety
Agent-readable metadata
Use this block or the embedded JSON to decide whether an agent should install this skill, choose an alternative, or ask for human review first.
Suited tasks
Suited agents
Install decision
Trust and risk
Outcome loop
Install command
npx skills add Affitor/affiliate-skills --skill comparison-post-writerDo not use when
Alternative
16.3K Stars
npx skills add hardikpandya/stop-slop --skill stop-slop
Alternative
4.8K Stars
npx skills add cursor/plugins --skill unslop
Alternative
37.4K Stars
npx skills add blader/humanizer --skill humanizer
Alternative
5.8K Stars
npx skills add petergyang/no-ai-slop --skill no-ai-slop
Agent safety v2
Sparse or mixed signals. Useful for discovery, but not for autonomous installation.
Test manually in an isolated workspace and compare against safer alternatives.
high
Skill metadata references terminal, CLI, shell, subprocess, or command execution workflows.
medium
Skill likely fetches remote pages, APIs, repositories, or external services.
medium
Skill may read or write project files, documents, generated artifacts, or local workspace state.
medium
Skill may inspect schemas, query databases, or work with persistent stores.
Agent resolve plan
The Resolve API returns the selected skill, alternatives, safety policy, audit notes, install target, and copy-paste prompt an agent can follow without scraping this page.
Open JSON
/api/agent/resolve?task=Use%20comparison-post-writer%20for%20an%20agent%20workflow&agent=codex&max_risk=medium
Resolve text
/api/agent/resolve?task=Use%20comparison-post-writer%20for%20an%20agent%20workflow&agent=codex&max_risk=medium&format=text
Install handoff
/api/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer/install
Agent should check
Copy prompt
Task: Use comparison-post-writer in this workspace.
Resolve first: https://www.openagentskill.com/api/agent/resolve?task=Use%20comparison-post-writer%20for%20an%20agent%20workflow&agent=codex&max_risk=medium
Review install handoff: https://www.openagentskill.com/api/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer/install
Install command: npx skills add Affitor/affiliate-skills --skill comparison-post-writer
Before running it, summarize audit warnings, required permissions, and the fallback skill if install is risky.Agent handoff
Use the public install endpoint to fetch the command, safety checklist, target prompts, and canonical links for this skill.
Install handoff
/api/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer/install
LLM text format
/api/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer/install?format=text
Find alternatives
/api/skills/search?q=comparison-post-writer&limit=3
Agent prompt
Use comparison-post-writer for this task. Review https://www.openagentskill.com/api/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer/install, then install with: npx skills add Affitor/affiliate-skills --skill comparison-post-writerRegistry metadata
This page exposes the same decision, trust, audit, use-case, and install signals through the Registry API, so agents can rank this skill without scraping the UI.
Manifest
/api/registry/manifest/affitor-comparison-post-writer
LLM text
/api/registry/manifest/affitor-comparison-post-writer?format=text
Install alias
/api/registry/install/affitor-comparison-post-writer
Recommend
/api/registry/recommend?task=Use%20comparison-post-writer%20in%20an%20agent%20workflow&limit=3
Agent fit
Research agents
Use-case tags
Platforms
Claude Code, OpenAI Agents, Cursor
Audit report
A machine-readable review of install readiness, security metadata, maintenance, and adoption risk.
Agent decision cockpit
Use this as a leading candidate, then validate the README and install path in your own agent stack.
Role in stack
Primary pick
Primary fit
Research agents
Trust label
Production-ready
Install path
Command ready
Use when
Evidence
review first
Implementation path
Trust profile
Useful candidate with missing or mixed trust signals. Keep it in an isolated workspace until the outcome loop proves task fit.
GitHub adoption
INFO639 GitHub stars
Stars/forks activity
INFO639 stars, 199 forks; issue activity unavailable in current metadata
Recent maintenance
PASS3mo since push
License clarity
PASSMIT
Good signals
Review before install
Recommended action
Run only in a sandbox and compare close alternatives before using it for real work.
Quality profile
Solid option that is likely worth shortlisting for production workflows.
Workflow fit
Investigate faster
I need my agent to research a topic, compare sources, and produce a concise report.
Automate repeated work
I need my agent to automate a repeated workflow across tools and files.
Publish consistently
I need my agent to turn research and product updates into useful content drafts.
Workflow fit
Turn skills into distribution
A workflow for turning newly indexed skills into SEO briefs, social drafts, comparison pages, and reusable publishing workflows.
Find, compare, and synthesize
A workflow for agents that gather sources, compare claims, summarize long material, and draft useful research briefs.
Ingest, retrieve, and cite
A workflow for document-heavy agents that ingest files, create searchable knowledge, retrieve relevant context, and answer with grounded sources.
Alternative shortlist
Similar skills that may fit this task.
Eliminates predictable AI writing patterns from prose while preserving specific meaning and reader trust.
Applies Cursor's prose-discipline rules to remove filler and AI writing tells from agent-facing and user-facing text.
Rewrites AI-sounding text so it reads naturally while preserving every factual claim and matching the writer's voice.
Audits or minimally edits drafts to remove named AI-writing patterns without flattening the author's voice.
--- name: comparison-post-writer description: > Write "X vs Y" comparison blog posts that help readers choose between two competing products. Triggers on: "write a comparison post", "X vs Y blog post", "compare [product A] and [product B]", "which is better [A] or [B]", "head to head comparison", "[product] vs [product] article", "comparison review", "write a versus article", "side by side comparison blog", "which should I choose [A] or [B]", "compare these two products for my blog". license: MIT version: "1.0.0" tags: ["affiliate-marketing", "blogging", "seo", "content-writing", "comparison", "versus"] compatibility: "Claude Code, ChatGPT, Gemini CLI, Cursor, Windsurf, OpenClaw, any AI agent" metadata: author: affitor version: "1.0" stage: S3-Blog ---
# Comparison Post Writer
Write high-converting "X vs Y" comparison blog posts that rank on Google and help readers make a confident buying decision. Each post includes a feature comparison table, individual product breakdowns, pros and cons, a clear winner recommendation, and affiliate CTAs placed at maximum-intent moments.
## When to Use
- User wants to compare two or three competing products side by side - User has two affiliate programs and wants a single article that covers both - User says "vs", "versus", "compare", "which is better", "side by side" - User wants to capture high-intent search traffic (X vs Y searches convert at 2-3x the rate of generic reviews) - User has a product from S1 and wants to frame it against competitors
## Workflow
### Step 1: Identify Products to Compare
Parse the user's request for product names. You need a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 3 products.
**If only 1 product is provided:** - Use `web_search` to find the top 1-2 competitors - Search: `"[product name] alternatives" OR "[product name] vs" site:g2.com OR site:capterra.com OR site:trustradius.com` - Pick the competitors with the most head-to-head search volume
**If 3+ products are provided:** - Keep all 3 if they are genuinely comparable - If the user listed 4+, ask which 2-3 to focus on — more than 3 makes the comparison unwieldy
**Affiliate priority**: The user's affiliate product goes first (featured position). If both products have affiliate links, feature the higher-commission one in the "winner" slot unless the product genuinely loses on quality.
### Step 2: Research Both Products
For each product, use `web_search` to gather: 1. **Pricing**: starting price, tiers, free trial availability 2. **Key features**: 8-12 features that matter to buyers 3. **Target audience**: who uses this product and why 4. **Known weaknesses**: common complaints on G2, Capterra, Reddit, or Trustpilot 5. **Unique differentiator**: one thing this product does better than everyone else 6. **Search volume signal**: `"[product A] vs [product B]"` — check if autocomplete shows this is a real query
Search queries to run per product: - `"[product name] review [year]"` - `"[product name] pricing"` - `"[product name] pros cons"`
### Step 3: Build the Comparison Framework
Determine the 6-10 comparison dimensions that matter most for this product category. These should be: - Directly relevant to buyer decisions (not vanity features) - Measurable or clearly differentiable between products - Things that appear in search queries ("does X have [feature]?")
**Example dimensions by category:** - Email tools: deliverability, automation, templates, integrations, pricing/contacts ratio, free plan - SEO tools: keyword database size, backlink data, site audit depth, reporting, API access, pricing - Video tools: resolution, AI avatars, voice cloning, templates, render speed, watermark on free plan - Project management: task limits on free, Gantt chart, time tracking, automations, integrations, mobile app
Assign a winner per dimension based on research. Mark ties where genuine.
### Step 4: Determine the Narrative Angle
Choose one of three angles based on what the data shows:
| Angle | When to use | Headline formula | |---|---|---| | **Clear winner** | One product is genuinely better for most users | "[A] vs [B]: [A] Wins for Most, But [B] Is Better If..." | | **It depends** | Products serve different audiences | "[A] vs [B]: Which Is Right for You? (Honest Comparison)" | | **Upset** | Lesser-known product beats the market leader | "[A] vs [B]: Why [Lesser-Known] Is Actually Better in [Year]" |
Default to "clear winner" — readers want a recommendation, not a non-answer.
### Step 5: Write the Article
Write the full comparison post following this exact structure:
**1. FTC Disclosure** (3 lines, above the fold) Read `shared/references/ftc-compliance.md` and use the medium format. Insert immediately after the title.
**2. Introduction** (150-250 words) - Open with the core tension: why this is a hard choice - State who each product is best suited for (one sentence each) - End with: "By the end of this post, you'll know exactly which one to pick." - Include target keyword naturally in the first 100 words
**3. Quick Verdict Box** (immediately after intro) A scannable summary for readers who won't read the full article: ``` **Quick Verdict** - Best overall: [Product A] — [one-line reason] - Best for [use case]: [Product B] — [one-line reason] - Best for budget: [Product X] - Skip if: [edge case where neither works] ```
**4. Product Overviews** (200-300 words each) One H2 section per product: - What it is and what it does - Who built it and when (brief credibility context) - The one thing it does better than anyone else - Starting price and free trial info - Affiliate CTA: `[Try [Product] free →](affiliate_url)`
**5. Feature Comparison Table** A full markdown table with all comparison dimensions: ``` | Feature | [Product A] | [Product B] | |---|---|---| | [Dimension 1] | ✅ Yes | ❌ No | | [Dimension 2] | ⭐ Better | Good | | Price | $X/mo | $Y/mo | ``` Use ✅ / ❌ / ⚠️ (partial) for binary features. Use descriptive text for nuanced ones. Bold the winner per row.
**6. Deep-Dive Sections** (one H2 per key dimension, 3-4 total) Pick the 3-4 dimensions that drive 80% of buying decisions. For each: - Explain what the feature does and why it matters - Compare both products specifically (not generically) - Include a sub-verdict: "Winner: [Product] because..."
**7. Pricing Breakdown** - Table showing all pricing tiers for both products - Calculate cost at 3 usage levels: starter, growing, scale - Highlight free plan differences - Note which has better value per feature
**8. Pros and Cons** Two H3 sections (one per product), each with 4-6 bullet points per list.
**9. Who Should Choose Each Product** Two H3 sections with bullet lists: - "Choose [Product A] if you..." - "Choose [Product B] if you..." Be specific — job titles, use cases, budget ranges, team sizes.
**10. The Verdict** (200-300 words) - State the winner clearly: "[Product A] is the better choice for most people." - Explain why in 2-3 sentences - Acknowledge the exception case where [Product B] wins - Final affiliate CTA (strong format): `**Get started with [Product A] →**(affiliate_url)` - If [Product B] also has affiliate link: secondary CTA below
**11. FAQ Section** (5-7 questions) Address the real questions people type into Google: - "Is [Product A] better than [Product B]?" - "Which is cheaper, [A] or [B]?" - "Does [Product A] offer a free trial?" - "Can I switch from [Product B] to [Product A]?" - "Which has better customer support?"
### Step 6: Format Output
Produce output in three parts:
**Part 1: SEO Metadata** ``` --- SEO METADATA --- Title: [title] Slug: [product-a]-vs-[product-b] Meta Description: [150-160 chars comparing both products with clear angle] Target Keyword: [product-a] vs [product-b] Secondary Keywords: [product-a] review, [product-b] alternatives, best [category] tool, [product-a] pricing Word Count: [actual] Format: comparison Winner: [product name] --- ```
**Part 2: Full Article** Complete markdown ready to paste into any blog platform.
**Part 3: Supplementary Data** FAQ schema questions, image suggestions (comparison screenshots), products featured with affiliate URLs, next steps.
## Input Schema
```yaml product_a: # REQUIRED — the primary affiliate product name: string description: string reward_value: string # e.g., "30% recurring" url: string # Affiliate link reward_type: string # "recurring" | "one-time" | "tiered" cookie_days: number tags: string[]
product_b: # REQUIRED — the product to compare against name: string url: string # Affiliate link if available, otherwise homepage description: string # Optional — will research if missing
product_c: # OPTIONAL — third product for 3-way comparison name: string url: string description: string
target_keyword: string # OPTIONAL — default: "[product_a] vs [product_b]" tone: string # OPTIONAL — "conversational" | "technical" | "professional" # Default: "conversational" angle: string # OPTIONAL — "clear-winner" | "it-depends" | "upset" # Default: auto-detected from research ```
### Step 7: Self-Validation
Before presenting output, verify:
- [ ] FTC disclosure above fold, medium format - [ ] Comparison table has 6-10 dimensions with ✅/❌/⚠️ indicators - [ ] Both products get fair, balanced coverage - [ ] Winner stated clearly in verdict section - [ ] Word count is 2,500-3,500 words
If any check fails, fix the output before delivering. Do not flag the checklist to the user — just ensure the output passes.
## Output Schema
```yaml output_schema_version: "1.0.0" # Semver — bump major on breaking changes article: title: string slug: string # e.g., "heygen-vs-synthesia" meta_description: string target_keyword: string format: "comparison" content: string # Full markdown article word_count: number winner: string # Name of the recommended product
comparison: dimensions: string[] # The features compared dimension_winners: # Who won each dimension - dimension: string winner: string # "product_a" | "product_b" | "tie"
products_featured: - name: string url: string role: string # "primary" | "compared" reward_value: string
seo: secondary_keywords: string[] faq_questions: - question: string answer: string image_suggestions: - description: string alt_text: string ```
## Output Format
Present as three sections: 1. **SEO Metadata** — fenced block for copy-paste into WordPress/Yoast/Ghost 2. **Article** — complete markdown, immediately publishable 3. **Supplementary** — FAQ schema, image suggestions, products list, next steps
Target word count: 2,500-3,500 words. Longer for complex SaaS tools with many features.
## Error Handling
- **Only 1 product provided**: Auto-search for top 2 competitors. Inform user: "I found [B] and [C] as the main competitors — using those. Let me know if you want different ones." - **No affiliate link for product_b**: Use homepage URL. Note in output: "No affiliate link for [B] — using homepage. You can still earn on [A] clicks." - **Products in completely different categories**: Stop and ask — comparing an email tool to a project management tool is not useful. - **Controversial product (MLM, scam accusations)**: Add warning note: "This product has mixed reputation signals. Review carefully before publishing — your credibility is at stake." - **Tie on most dimensions**: Use "it depends" angle. Never force a winner that isn't real — readers trust honest comparisons more.
## Examples
**Example 1: Two affiliate products** User: "Write a comparison post: HeyGen vs Synthesia" Action: product_a=HeyGen (affiliate), product_b=Synthesia (affiliate), research both, detect angle=clear-winner (or it-depends based on data), write 3,000-word comparison targeti
Source provenance
Decision snapshot
639 GitHub stars
Audit
Install and adoption review
Agent-proven evidence
Outcome reports after resolve, review, install, and one narrow run.
No agent outcome data yet. The first agent run can report success, setup needs, risk blocks, failure, or not-relevant through /api/agent/outcome.
Install
Free and open source. Review the report before installing into production agents.
Growth loop
Scenario-led draft for comparison-post-writer, ready for a manual X post.
comparison-post-writer: Write "X vs Y" comparison blog posts that help readers choose between two competing products.... 639 stars https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer?ref=x
Listing + install path for comparison-post-writer: https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer?ref=x Install: npx skills add Affitor/affiliate-skills --skill comparison-post-writer
Listing source
This listing was indexed from public sources and is not marked official until a maintainer claim is approved.
Attribution links to the public repository or creator profile. Creators can claim the listing to update ownership signals.
Claim this skillOwner claim
This Registry indexed listing is attributed to Affitor but is not marked official yet. Claim it to add a verified owner signal and make future launch, install, and audit updates easier to trust.
Creator backlink kit
Show the canonical listing, current trust and audit signals, and real Agent-Proven evidence where developers evaluate the repository.
[](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer?ref=github&utm_source=github&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=creator_badge)
[](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer?ref=github&utm_source=github&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=creator_badge)
[](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer/audit)
[](https://www.openagentskill.com/skills/affitor-comparison-post-writer?ref=github&utm_source=github&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=creator_badge)Affitor
@affitor
Share whether this skill looks useful for your agent workflow. Aggregated feedback improves rankings over time.
Sandbox only
stop-slop
Eliminates predictable AI writing patterns from prose while preserving specific meaning and reader trust.
16.3K Starsunslop
Applies Cursor's prose-discipline rules to remove filler and AI writing tells from agent-facing and user-facing text.
4.8K StarsHumanizer
Rewrites AI-sounding text so it reads naturally while preserving every factual claim and matching the writer's voice.
37.4K Starsno-ai-slop
Audits or minimally edits drafts to remove named AI-writing patterns without flattening the author's voice.
5.8K StarsPermission surface
shell or command execution, network or browser access
Agent outcomes
No agent outcome data yet
Docs
Strong README/SKILL.md context
Risk summary
Install readiness