Rank
70
AI Agents & MCPs & AI Workflow Automation • (~400 MCP servers for AI agents) • AI Automation / AI Agent with MCPs • AI Workflows & AI Agents • MCPs for AI Agents
Traction
No public download signal
Freshness
Updated 2d ago
Xpersona Agent
Complete competitive intelligence system — market mapping, product teardowns, pricing intel, win/loss analysis, battlecards, and strategic monitoring. Goes far beyond SEO to cover the full business landscape. --- name: afrexai-competitive-intel description: Complete competitive intelligence system — market mapping, product teardowns, pricing intel, win/loss analysis, battlecards, and strategic monitoring. Goes far beyond SEO to cover the full business landscape. --- Competitive Intelligence Engine A complete system for understanding, tracking, and outmaneuvering competitors. Covers market mapping, product analysis, pricin
clawhub skill install skills:1kalin:afrexai-competitive-intelOverall rank
#62
Adoption
No public adoption signal
Trust
Unknown
Freshness
Feb 25, 2026
Freshness
Last checked Feb 25, 2026
Best For
afrexai-competitive-intel is best for you, they workflows where OpenClaw compatibility matters.
Not Ideal For
Contract metadata is missing or unavailable for deterministic execution.
Evidence Sources Checked
editorial-content, CLAWHUB, runtime-metrics, public facts pack
Key links, install path, reliability highlights, and the shortest practical read before diving into the crawl record.
Overview
Complete competitive intelligence system — market mapping, product teardowns, pricing intel, win/loss analysis, battlecards, and strategic monitoring. Goes far beyond SEO to cover the full business landscape. --- name: afrexai-competitive-intel description: Complete competitive intelligence system — market mapping, product teardowns, pricing intel, win/loss analysis, battlecards, and strategic monitoring. Goes far beyond SEO to cover the full business landscape. --- Competitive Intelligence Engine A complete system for understanding, tracking, and outmaneuvering competitors. Covers market mapping, product analysis, pricin Capability contract not published. No trust telemetry is available yet. Last updated 4/15/2026.
Trust score
Unknown
Compatibility
OpenClaw
Freshness
Feb 25, 2026
Vendor
Openclaw
Artifacts
0
Benchmarks
0
Last release
Unpublished
Install & run
clawhub skill install skills:1kalin:afrexai-competitive-intelSetup complexity is LOW. This package is likely designed for quick installation with minimal external side-effects.
Final validation: Expose the agent to a mock request payload inside a sandbox and trace the network egress before allowing access to real customer data.
Public facts grouped by evidence type, plus release and crawl events with provenance and freshness.
Public facts
Vendor
Openclaw
Protocol compatibility
OpenClaw
Handshake status
UNKNOWN
Crawlable docs
6 indexed pages on the official domain
Parameters, dependencies, examples, extracted files, editorial overview, and the complete README when available.
Captured outputs
Extracted files
0
Examples
6
Snippets
0
Languages
typescript
Parameters
yaml
market_map:
category: "[Your Category]"
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
total_addressable_market: "$XB"
competitors:
- name: "Competitor A"
tier: "direct"
website: "https://..."
founded: 2019
funding: "$50M Series B"
estimated_revenue: "$10-20M ARR"
employee_count: 150
employee_trend: "growing" # growing | stable | shrinking
hq: "San Francisco, CA"
key_customers: ["Customer 1", "Customer 2"]
primary_market: "mid-market" # smb | mid-market | enterprise
positioning: "All-in-one platform for X"
strengths: ["Feature A", "Strong brand"]
weaknesses: ["Expensive", "Slow support"]
threat_level: "high" # low | medium | high | critical
notes: ""yaml
feature_matrix:
last_updated: "YYYY-MM-DD"
categories:
- name: "Core Features"
features:
- name: "Feature X"
us: "full" # none | partial | full | superior
competitor_a: "full"
competitor_b: "partial"
weight: 5 # 1-5 importance to buyer
notes: "We have deeper customization"
- name: "Feature Y"
us: "none"
competitor_a: "full"
competitor_b: "full"
weight: 3
notes: "On our roadmap for Q3"
- name: "Integrations"
features:
- name: "Salesforce"
us: "full"
competitor_a: "partial"
weight: 4markdown
## [Competitor Name] Product Teardown **Date:** YYYY-MM-DD **Analyst:** [name] ### First Impressions (0-5 min) - Homepage messaging: What problem do they lead with? - Sign-up friction: How many steps? What info required? - Time to value: How fast can you DO something? - Design quality: Modern, dated, cluttered, clean? ### Onboarding (5-30 min) - Guided tour? Checklist? Video? Nothing? - Sample data provided? Sandbox mode? - How quickly did you feel competent? - What confused you? ### Core Workflow - Complete their primary use case end-to-end - Note: steps required, clicks per task, speed, error handling - Screenshot key screens ### Differentiators - What can they do that we can't? (be honest) - What's their "magic moment"? - What do their happiest customers praise? (check G2 reviews) ### Weaknesses - Where did you get stuck? - What felt missing or half-baked? - What do their angriest customers complain about? (check G2 1-2 star reviews) ### Pricing vs Value - What plan would a typical customer need? - Price per user/month at that tier? - Any hidden costs (implementation, support, integrations)? - Free trial? Freemium? Money-back guarantee? ### Technical Assessment - Stack: (check Wappalyzer, BuiltWith, job postings) - API: Public? REST/GraphQL? Rate limits? Docs quality? - Mobile: Native app? Responsive web? PWA? - Performance: Page load speed, UI responsiveness - Uptime: Status page? Historical incidents?
yaml
pricing_intel:
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
competitors:
- name: "Us"
model: "per-seat" # per-seat | usage | flat | hybrid | freemium
entry_price: "$29/user/mo"
mid_price: "$79/user/mo"
enterprise_price: "Custom"
free_tier: true
free_limits: "5 users, 1000 records"
annual_discount: "20%"
contract_required: false
implementation_fee: "$0"
hidden_costs: []
- name: "Competitor A"
model: "per-seat"
entry_price: "$49/user/mo"
mid_price: "$99/user/mo"
enterprise_price: "Custom ($150+/user)"
free_tier: false
annual_discount: "15%"
contract_required: true # annual minimum
implementation_fee: "$5,000"
hidden_costs: ["API access on enterprise only", "SSO $50/user extra"]markdown
# 🏆 Battlecard: Us vs [Competitor] **Last Updated:** YYYY-MM-DD | **Confidence:** High/Medium/Low ## Quick Stats | Metric | Us | Them | |--------|-----|------| | Founded | | | | Funding | | | | Est. Revenue | | | | Employees | | | | G2 Rating | | | | Gartner Position | | | ## Their Pitch (in their words) "[Their homepage headline or elevator pitch]" ## Why Customers Choose Us Over Them 1. **[Reason 1]**: [Specific proof point — customer quote, metric, demo moment] 2. **[Reason 2]**: [Specific proof point] 3. **[Reason 3]**: [Specific proof point] ## Why Customers Choose Them Over Us (be honest) 1. **[Reason 1]**: [And how to counter it] 2. **[Reason 2]**: [And how to counter it] ## Landmines to Plant 🧨 Questions to ask the prospect that expose competitor weaknesses: 1. "Ask them how they handle [weakness area] — you'll find it requires [workaround]" 2. "Request a demo of [specific feature] — it's not as deep as it looks" 3. "Ask about [hidden cost] — it's not on the pricing page" ## Objection Handling **"[Competitor] is cheaper"** > Response: "At first glance, yes. But when you factor in [hidden cost 1], [hidden cost 2], and [limitation requiring workaround], the total cost is actually [higher/comparable]. Plus, [our unique value] saves you [X hours/dollars] per [period]." **"[Competitor] has [feature we lack]"** > Response: "[Acknowledge honestly]. Here's why our customers find that [our approach] actually works better for [their use case]: [specific reasoning]. [Customer name] evaluated both and chose us specifically because [reason]." **"We're already using [Competitor]"** > Response: "That makes sense — they're solid at [genuine strength]. The customers who switch to us typically hit a wall with [specific limitation]. Are you experiencing [common pain point with that competitor]?" ## Trap Plays (When to Walk Away) - If prospect needs [specific capability we truly lack], acknowledge it honestly - If they're deeply embedded in [competitor ecosystem], s
yaml
win_loss:
deal: "[Company Name]"
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
outcome: "won" # won | lost | no-decision
deal_size: "$X ARR"
sales_cycle_days: 45
competitors_evaluated: ["Competitor A", "Competitor B"]
decision_factors:
- factor: "Ease of use"
importance: 5 # 1-5
our_score: 4 # 1-5
winner_score: 3
notes: "Demo experience was decisive"
- factor: "Price"
importance: 4
our_score: 3
winner_score: 4
notes: "We were 20% more expensive but justified by ROI"
- factor: "Integration with Salesforce"
importance: 5
our_score: 5
winner_score: 2
notes: "They required middleware; we're native"
champion: "VP of Sales"
decision_maker: "CRO"
buying_trigger: "Previous tool couldn't scale past 50 users"
key_quote: "Your Salesforce integration sealed the deal"
lessons:
- "Lead with integration story for Salesforce-heavy orgs"
- "ROI calculator was critical for justifying premium price"Editorial read
Docs source
CLAWHUB
Editorial quality
ready
Complete competitive intelligence system — market mapping, product teardowns, pricing intel, win/loss analysis, battlecards, and strategic monitoring. Goes far beyond SEO to cover the full business landscape. --- name: afrexai-competitive-intel description: Complete competitive intelligence system — market mapping, product teardowns, pricing intel, win/loss analysis, battlecards, and strategic monitoring. Goes far beyond SEO to cover the full business landscape. --- Competitive Intelligence Engine A complete system for understanding, tracking, and outmaneuvering competitors. Covers market mapping, product analysis, pricin
A complete system for understanding, tracking, and outmaneuvering competitors. Covers market mapping, product analysis, pricing intelligence, sales battlecards, win/loss analysis, and ongoing monitoring.
Classify every competitor into one of four tiers:
| Tier | Definition | Example | Monitoring Frequency | |------|-----------|---------|---------------------| | Direct | Same product, same buyer | Your closest rivals | Weekly | | Adjacent | Different product, overlapping buyer | Platform expanding into your space | Bi-weekly | | Indirect | Different solution to same problem | Spreadsheets replacing your SaaS | Monthly | | Emerging | Early-stage, same vision | YC startups in your category | Monthly |
Search these sources systematically:
market_map:
category: "[Your Category]"
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
total_addressable_market: "$XB"
competitors:
- name: "Competitor A"
tier: "direct"
website: "https://..."
founded: 2019
funding: "$50M Series B"
estimated_revenue: "$10-20M ARR"
employee_count: 150
employee_trend: "growing" # growing | stable | shrinking
hq: "San Francisco, CA"
key_customers: ["Customer 1", "Customer 2"]
primary_market: "mid-market" # smb | mid-market | enterprise
positioning: "All-in-one platform for X"
strengths: ["Feature A", "Strong brand"]
weaknesses: ["Expensive", "Slow support"]
threat_level: "high" # low | medium | high | critical
notes: ""
For each direct competitor, build a feature comparison:
feature_matrix:
last_updated: "YYYY-MM-DD"
categories:
- name: "Core Features"
features:
- name: "Feature X"
us: "full" # none | partial | full | superior
competitor_a: "full"
competitor_b: "partial"
weight: 5 # 1-5 importance to buyer
notes: "We have deeper customization"
- name: "Feature Y"
us: "none"
competitor_a: "full"
competitor_b: "full"
weight: 3
notes: "On our roadmap for Q3"
- name: "Integrations"
features:
- name: "Salesforce"
us: "full"
competitor_a: "partial"
weight: 4
For each major competitor, conduct a structured teardown:
## [Competitor Name] Product Teardown
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Analyst:** [name]
### First Impressions (0-5 min)
- Homepage messaging: What problem do they lead with?
- Sign-up friction: How many steps? What info required?
- Time to value: How fast can you DO something?
- Design quality: Modern, dated, cluttered, clean?
### Onboarding (5-30 min)
- Guided tour? Checklist? Video? Nothing?
- Sample data provided? Sandbox mode?
- How quickly did you feel competent?
- What confused you?
### Core Workflow
- Complete their primary use case end-to-end
- Note: steps required, clicks per task, speed, error handling
- Screenshot key screens
### Differentiators
- What can they do that we can't? (be honest)
- What's their "magic moment"?
- What do their happiest customers praise? (check G2 reviews)
### Weaknesses
- Where did you get stuck?
- What felt missing or half-baked?
- What do their angriest customers complain about? (check G2 1-2 star reviews)
### Pricing vs Value
- What plan would a typical customer need?
- Price per user/month at that tier?
- Any hidden costs (implementation, support, integrations)?
- Free trial? Freemium? Money-back guarantee?
### Technical Assessment
- Stack: (check Wappalyzer, BuiltWith, job postings)
- API: Public? REST/GraphQL? Rate limits? Docs quality?
- Mobile: Native app? Responsive web? PWA?
- Performance: Page load speed, UI responsiveness
- Uptime: Status page? Historical incidents?
Score each competitor's product (0-10 per dimension):
| Dimension | What to Evaluate | Weight | |-----------|-----------------|--------| | Ease of Setup | Time to first value, onboarding friction | 15% | | Core UX | Primary workflow efficiency, intuitiveness | 25% | | Feature Depth | Covers edge cases, power user needs | 20% | | Reliability | Uptime, bugs encountered, error handling | 15% | | Integrations | Ecosystem breadth, API quality | 10% | | Support | Response time, quality, self-serve resources | 10% | | Mobile | Native quality, feature parity | 5% |
Total = weighted sum. Compare across competitors.
pricing_intel:
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
competitors:
- name: "Us"
model: "per-seat" # per-seat | usage | flat | hybrid | freemium
entry_price: "$29/user/mo"
mid_price: "$79/user/mo"
enterprise_price: "Custom"
free_tier: true
free_limits: "5 users, 1000 records"
annual_discount: "20%"
contract_required: false
implementation_fee: "$0"
hidden_costs: []
- name: "Competitor A"
model: "per-seat"
entry_price: "$49/user/mo"
mid_price: "$99/user/mo"
enterprise_price: "Custom ($150+/user)"
free_tier: false
annual_discount: "15%"
contract_required: true # annual minimum
implementation_fee: "$5,000"
hidden_costs: ["API access on enterprise only", "SSO $50/user extra"]
Answer these questions:
Based on analysis, recommend one of:
| Strategy | When to Use | Risk | |----------|------------|------| | Premium | Clearly superior product + brand | Losing price-sensitive deals | | Parity | Similar product, compete on other axes | Race to bottom | | Penetration | New entrant, need market share fast | Perception of low quality | | Value | Better product at lower price | Margin pressure if costs rise | | Niche | Specialized for segment competitors ignore | Small TAM |
Create one per direct competitor:
# 🏆 Battlecard: Us vs [Competitor]
**Last Updated:** YYYY-MM-DD | **Confidence:** High/Medium/Low
## Quick Stats
| Metric | Us | Them |
|--------|-----|------|
| Founded | | |
| Funding | | |
| Est. Revenue | | |
| Employees | | |
| G2 Rating | | |
| Gartner Position | | |
## Their Pitch (in their words)
"[Their homepage headline or elevator pitch]"
## Why Customers Choose Us Over Them
1. **[Reason 1]**: [Specific proof point — customer quote, metric, demo moment]
2. **[Reason 2]**: [Specific proof point]
3. **[Reason 3]**: [Specific proof point]
## Why Customers Choose Them Over Us (be honest)
1. **[Reason 1]**: [And how to counter it]
2. **[Reason 2]**: [And how to counter it]
## Landmines to Plant 🧨
Questions to ask the prospect that expose competitor weaknesses:
1. "Ask them how they handle [weakness area] — you'll find it requires [workaround]"
2. "Request a demo of [specific feature] — it's not as deep as it looks"
3. "Ask about [hidden cost] — it's not on the pricing page"
## Objection Handling
**"[Competitor] is cheaper"**
> Response: "At first glance, yes. But when you factor in [hidden cost 1], [hidden cost 2], and [limitation requiring workaround], the total cost is actually [higher/comparable]. Plus, [our unique value] saves you [X hours/dollars] per [period]."
**"[Competitor] has [feature we lack]"**
> Response: "[Acknowledge honestly]. Here's why our customers find that [our approach] actually works better for [their use case]: [specific reasoning]. [Customer name] evaluated both and chose us specifically because [reason]."
**"We're already using [Competitor]"**
> Response: "That makes sense — they're solid at [genuine strength]. The customers who switch to us typically hit a wall with [specific limitation]. Are you experiencing [common pain point with that competitor]?"
## Trap Plays (When to Walk Away)
- If prospect needs [specific capability we truly lack], acknowledge it honestly
- If they're deeply embedded in [competitor ecosystem], switching cost may be too high
- If deal size is below $[X], cost of competing isn't worth it
## Win Stories
- **[Customer A]**: Switched from [Competitor] because [reason]. Result: [metric improvement]
- **[Customer B]**: Evaluated both, chose us because [reason]. Quote: "[testimonial]"
## Recent Intel
- [Date]: [Competitor] announced [product change/funding/hire]
- [Date]: [Customer feedback about competitor]
For the sales team's daily use:
| Objection | Short Response | Proof Point | |-----------|---------------|-------------| | "Too expensive" | [Value reframe] | [ROI stat or customer quote] | | "Never heard of you" | [Social proof] | [Customer logos, G2 rank] | | "Missing [feature]" | [Alternative or roadmap] | [Workaround or timeline] | | "Happy with current tool" | [Trigger question] | [Common pain with incumbent] | | "Need enterprise features" | [What we have] | [Enterprise customer reference] |
After every significant deal (won or lost), capture:
win_loss:
deal: "[Company Name]"
date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
outcome: "won" # won | lost | no-decision
deal_size: "$X ARR"
sales_cycle_days: 45
competitors_evaluated: ["Competitor A", "Competitor B"]
decision_factors:
- factor: "Ease of use"
importance: 5 # 1-5
our_score: 4 # 1-5
winner_score: 3
notes: "Demo experience was decisive"
- factor: "Price"
importance: 4
our_score: 3
winner_score: 4
notes: "We were 20% more expensive but justified by ROI"
- factor: "Integration with Salesforce"
importance: 5
our_score: 5
winner_score: 2
notes: "They required middleware; we're native"
champion: "VP of Sales"
decision_maker: "CRO"
buying_trigger: "Previous tool couldn't scale past 50 users"
key_quote: "Your Salesforce integration sealed the deal"
lessons:
- "Lead with integration story for Salesforce-heavy orgs"
- "ROI calculator was critical for justifying premium price"
Track quarterly:
## Q[X] Win/Loss Summary
### Win Rate by Competitor
| Competitor | Wins | Losses | Win Rate | Trend |
|-----------|------|--------|----------|-------|
| Competitor A | 12 | 8 | 60% | ↑ (was 50%) |
| Competitor B | 5 | 15 | 25% | ↓ (was 35%) |
| No competition | 20 | 3 | 87% | → |
### Top Win Reasons (ranked by frequency)
1. Ease of use (mentioned in 65% of wins)
2. Integration depth (55%)
3. Customer support (40%)
### Top Loss Reasons (ranked by frequency)
1. Price (mentioned in 70% of losses)
2. Missing [specific feature] (45%)
3. Incumbent relationship (30%)
### Action Items from This Quarter's Losses
1. [Feature gap] → Product team building for Q[X+1]
2. [Price objection] → New ROI calculator + case study
3. [Competitor strength] → Invest in [counter-strategy]
Set up monitoring for each direct competitor:
| Signal | Source | Frequency | What to Look For | |--------|--------|-----------|-----------------| | Product changes | Their changelog/blog | Weekly | New features, deprecations | | Pricing changes | /pricing page + Wayback | Monthly | Price increases, new tiers, model changes | | Hiring | LinkedIn Jobs | Bi-weekly | Engineering surge = new product. Sales surge = growth push | | Funding | Crunchbase, TechCrunch | As it happens | New round = aggressive expansion coming | | Leadership | LinkedIn, press | As it happens | New CEO/CRO = strategy shift likely | | Reviews | G2, Capterra | Monthly | Sentiment shifts, recurring complaints | | Content | Their blog, social | Weekly | Messaging changes, new positioning | | Customers | Press releases, case studies | Monthly | Logos gained, industries targeted | | Community | Reddit, HN, Twitter | Weekly | Complaints, praise, feature requests |
## Competitive Intel Brief — Week of [Date]
### 🔴 Critical (action needed)
- [Competitor X] launched [feature] that directly competes with our [feature]
- Impact: [assessment]
- Recommended response: [action]
### 🟡 Notable (monitor)
- [Competitor Y] raised Series C ($40M) — expect aggressive hiring/marketing
- [Competitor Z] changed pricing model from per-seat to usage-based
### 🟢 Informational
- [Competitor X] published blog post about [topic]
- [Competitor Y] hiring 3 new enterprise AEs in EMEA
### Win/Loss This Week
- Won [Deal] vs [Competitor] — reason: [X]
- Lost [Deal] to [Competitor] — reason: [X]
Rate your moat and each competitor's (1-5):
| Moat Type | Description | Us | Comp A | Comp B | |-----------|------------|-----|--------|--------| | Network Effects | Product gets better with more users | | | | | Switching Costs | Pain of leaving increases over time | | | | | Data Advantage | Proprietary data that improves product | | | | | Brand | Trust, recognition, preference | | | | | Scale Economies | Cost advantages from size | | | | | Regulatory | Licenses, certifications, compliance | | | | | Technology | Patents, proprietary tech, speed | | | | | Ecosystem | Integrations, partnerships, marketplace | | | |
Total moat score = sum. Higher = harder to displace.
For each major competitor move, predict their likely response to YOUR moves:
**If we [action]...**
- Competitor A will likely: [response] because [reasoning]
- Competitor B will likely: [response] because [reasoning]
- Timeline: [how fast they'll respond]
- Our counter-move: [what we do next]
After mapping all competitors, look for:
| Command | What It Does | |---------|-------------| | "Map my competitive landscape" | Full Phase 1 market mapping | | "Tear down [competitor]" | Product teardown (Phase 2) | | "Compare pricing with [competitors]" | Pricing intelligence (Phase 3) | | "Build battlecard for [competitor]" | Sales battlecard (Phase 4) | | "Analyze our win/loss data" | Win/loss patterns (Phase 5) | | "Weekly competitive brief" | Monitoring summary (Phase 6) | | "Assess our competitive moat" | Strategic analysis (Phase 7) | | "Find blue ocean opportunities" | Gap analysis (Phase 7.3) | | "How should we respond to [competitor move]?" | Response prediction (Phase 7.2) | | "Full competitive review" | All phases, comprehensive output |
Machine endpoints, contract coverage, trust signals, runtime metrics, benchmarks, and guardrails for agent-to-agent use.
Machine interfaces
Contract coverage
Status
missing
Auth
None
Streaming
No
Data region
Unspecified
Protocol support
Requires: none
Forbidden: none
Guardrails
Operational confidence: low
curl -s "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/snapshot"
curl -s "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/contract"
curl -s "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/trust"
Operational fit
Trust signals
Handshake
UNKNOWN
Confidence
unknown
Attempts 30d
unknown
Fallback rate
unknown
Runtime metrics
Observed P50
unknown
Observed P95
unknown
Rate limit
unknown
Estimated cost
unknown
Do not use if
Raw contract, invocation, trust, capability, facts, and change-event payloads for machine-side inspection.
Contract JSON
{
"contractStatus": "missing",
"authModes": [],
"requires": [],
"forbidden": [],
"supportsMcp": false,
"supportsA2a": false,
"supportsStreaming": false,
"inputSchemaRef": null,
"outputSchemaRef": null,
"dataRegion": null,
"contractUpdatedAt": null,
"sourceUpdatedAt": null,
"freshnessSeconds": null
}Invocation Guide
{
"preferredApi": {
"snapshotUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/snapshot",
"contractUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/contract",
"trustUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/trust"
},
"curlExamples": [
"curl -s \"https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/snapshot\"",
"curl -s \"https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/contract\"",
"curl -s \"https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/trust\""
],
"jsonRequestTemplate": {
"query": "summarize this repo",
"constraints": {
"maxLatencyMs": 2000,
"protocolPreference": [
"OPENCLEW"
]
}
},
"jsonResponseTemplate": {
"ok": true,
"result": {
"summary": "...",
"confidence": 0.9
},
"meta": {
"source": "CLAWHUB",
"generatedAt": "2026-04-17T05:23:22.725Z"
}
},
"retryPolicy": {
"maxAttempts": 3,
"backoffMs": [
500,
1500,
3500
],
"retryableConditions": [
"HTTP_429",
"HTTP_503",
"NETWORK_TIMEOUT"
]
}
}Trust JSON
{
"status": "unavailable",
"handshakeStatus": "UNKNOWN",
"verificationFreshnessHours": null,
"reputationScore": null,
"p95LatencyMs": null,
"successRate30d": null,
"fallbackRate": null,
"attempts30d": null,
"trustUpdatedAt": null,
"trustConfidence": "unknown",
"sourceUpdatedAt": null,
"freshnessSeconds": null
}Capability Matrix
{
"rows": [
{
"key": "OPENCLEW",
"type": "protocol",
"support": "unknown",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Listed on profile"
},
{
"key": "you",
"type": "capability",
"support": "supported",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Declared in agent profile metadata"
},
{
"key": "they",
"type": "capability",
"support": "supported",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Declared in agent profile metadata"
}
],
"flattenedTokens": "protocol:OPENCLEW|unknown|profile capability:you|supported|profile capability:they|supported|profile"
}Facts JSON
[
{
"factKey": "docs_crawl",
"category": "integration",
"label": "Crawlable docs",
"value": "6 indexed pages on the official domain",
"href": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceUrl": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceType": "search_document",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T05:03:46.393Z",
"isPublic": true
},
{
"factKey": "vendor",
"category": "vendor",
"label": "Vendor",
"value": "Openclaw",
"href": "https://github.com/openclaw/skills/tree/main/skills/1kalin/afrexai-competitive-intel",
"sourceUrl": "https://github.com/openclaw/skills/tree/main/skills/1kalin/afrexai-competitive-intel",
"sourceType": "profile",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T00:45:39.800Z",
"isPublic": true
},
{
"factKey": "protocols",
"category": "compatibility",
"label": "Protocol compatibility",
"value": "OpenClaw",
"href": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/contract",
"sourceUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/contract",
"sourceType": "contract",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T00:45:39.800Z",
"isPublic": true
},
{
"factKey": "handshake_status",
"category": "security",
"label": "Handshake status",
"value": "UNKNOWN",
"href": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/trust",
"sourceUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-competitive-intel/trust",
"sourceType": "trust",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": null,
"isPublic": true
}
]Change Events JSON
[
{
"eventType": "docs_update",
"title": "Docs refreshed: Sign in to GitHub · GitHub",
"description": "Fresh crawlable documentation was indexed for the official domain.",
"href": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceUrl": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceType": "search_document",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T05:03:46.393Z",
"isPublic": true
}
]Sponsored
Ads related to afrexai-competitive-intel and adjacent AI workflows.