# Screenshot Teardown Skill

Marketing pages say what a competitor claims; screenshots show what they shipped. This skill reads real UI evidence — layout, copy, defaults, friction, what's promoted and what's buried — and turns it into competitive insight you can defend, because every claim points at pixels.

## What This Skill Produces

- A **screen-by-screen read**: what each screenshot shows, what the design is optimising for, where the friction is
- **Strategic inferences** — pricing/packaging signals, target-user signals, maturity signals — each labelled as inference and tied to its visual evidence
- **Learn / steal / avoid** recommendations for your own product

## Required Inputs

- **The screenshots** (up to ~5 per pass; more → ask which flow matters most). If none attached, ask — never tear down from memory of the product.
- **Your product and angle** (ask if missing): who's analysing, and for what decision (pricing? onboarding redesign? battlecard?)

## Reading Method

1. **Anchor every claim to pixels.** "Their onboarding asks for a credit card at step 1" — only if the screenshot shows it. Cite which screenshot each observation comes from.
2. **Read the hierarchy, not just the content.** What's biggest, first, pre-selected, and colourful is what they *want* used; what's behind a "More" menu is what they don't. Defaults are strategy.
3. **Count the friction.** Fields, steps, decisions, permission asks — visible effort before value is a measurable choice.
4. **Read the copy as positioning.** Button labels, empty states, and upgrade nags reveal the audience and the monetisation pressure better than their homepage does.
5. **Separate the two registers strictly:**
   - **Observed** — on screen, citable
   - **Inferred** — a reading of intent ("the pre-selected annual plan suggests LTV pressure"), always labelled `[inference]`
6. **Mind the screenshot's limits.** One user's session, one plan tier, one moment. Note what state the shots can't show (A/B variants, other tiers, mobile vs desktop).

## Output Format

### Screenshot teardown: [competitor] — [flow examined]

**Evidence base:** [n] screenshots of [what], captured [date if known]. What this evidence can't show: [limits].

**Screen-by-screen:**
**[#1 — screen name]** — Shows: [observed]. Optimised for: [read]. Friction: [count/notes]. Notable copy: "[verbatim]".

**What they're optimising for overall:** [2-3 lines synthesising the design intent]

**Strategic signals:**
| Signal | Evidence (screenshot #) | Observed / Inference |
|---|---|---|

**For us — learn / steal / avoid:**
- **Learn:** [pattern worth understanding]
- **Steal:** [specific, adaptable pattern — with what to change]
- **Avoid:** [their visible mistake and why we think it's one]

## Quality Checks

- [ ] Every observation cites its screenshot; every inference is labelled `[inference]`
- [ ] Copy is quoted verbatim where it carries the point, not paraphrased
- [ ] The friction count is actual (fields/steps visible), not vibes
- [ ] The teardown states what the screenshots *cannot* show
- [ ] Recommendations name what to change when stealing a pattern — context transplants fail

## Anti-Patterns

- [ ] Do not analyse a product from training-data memory when screenshots are provided — the pixels are the source of truth, and the product has probably changed
- [ ] Do not proceed without images — that's `competitor-teardown`'s job
- [ ] Do not present inferences as facts — "they're struggling with churn" is a reading, not a screenshot
- [ ] Do not sneer — "cluttered" is not analysis; name what the clutter costs and whom it serves
- [ ] Do not extrapolate a whole strategy from one screen — say when the evidence is thin
