4.2 KiB
4.2 KiB
Research Methodology
Dispatch Architecture
Team Composition
Each batch is split across 3 parallel research teams, each covering 3-8 sites:
- Team Alpha: Marketing/landing optimization + scraping/monitoring tools
- Team Bravo: Micro-SaaS platforms + social/content tools
- Team Charlie: Career/local discovery + document tools (typically highest priority due to HotNow competitive overlap)
Model Selection
- Default: deepseek-v4-pro (cost-effective, strong at structured analysis)
- Premium: Claude Sonnet 5 for mission-critical competitive analysis (e.g., Locale-NYC vs HotNow)
- Fallback: deepseek-v4-flash for high-volume scraping passes
Dispatch Pattern
delegate_task(tasks=[
{goal: "...", context: "...", role: "orchestrator"},
{goal: "...", context: "...", role: "orchestrator"},
{goal: "...", context: "...", role: "orchestrator"}
])
Each team subagent is an orchestrator — they can spawn their own leaf subagents for individual site scraping. This keeps context windows manageable and enables parallel site analysis.
Site Analysis Protocol
Per-Site Mandatory Extraction
- Core product/service — What do they actually sell? (not what their tagline says)
- Pricing model — Free tier? Monthly? Per-seat? Enterprise?
- Key features — The 3-5 things that define the product
- UI/UX patterns — Layout decisions, card designs, search patterns, filter approaches
- USP (Unique Selling Proposition) — What's their "one thing"?
- Target audience — Who is this for? (evidence from copy, not assumption)
- Tech stack indicators — Framework hints, JS libraries, hosting clues
- Polish rating (1-5) — Landing page quality, copy clarity, conversion strategy
Competitive Comparison Dimensions
When comparing a target site to an ITPP product, evaluate across:
- Feature completeness
- UX/UI polish
- Monetization strategy
- Data pipeline (how do they get their content?)
- Mobile readiness
- Conversion funnel
- Brand voice and positioning
Cross-Reference Protocol
Feature Mapping
Every extracted feature is mapped to at least one ITPP product with:
- What: The specific feature (e.g., "their tiered pricing table with hover comparison")
- From: Source site
- To: Target ITPP product
- Why: Reason this feature would improve the product
- Effort: Low / Medium / High implementation estimate
- Impact: 1-5 rating of expected user impact
Priority Tiers
- P0 (Ship This Week): 1-2 day features that close obvious gaps
- P1 (Next Sprint): 3-7 day features that add significant value
- P2 (Roadmap): Features requiring refactoring or new infrastructure
- P3 (Nice to Have): "Eventually" features with marginal impact
New Product Identification
Signal Detection
A new product opportunity exists when:
- 3+ sites in a batch cluster around the same problem
- A site solves a problem in one vertical that doesn't exist in another
- A "pick-and-shovel" opportunity emerges (tools for the toolmakers)
- A local version of a city-specific app is viable (e.g., Locale-NYC → HotNow Savannah)
Evaluation Criteria
- Market size estimate (rough)
- Competition density
- Our unique advantage
- MVP scope and timeline
- AI cost for ongoing operation
- Domain availability
Cost Tracking
Per-Batch Cost Attribution
Research Batch 001:
Team Alpha: $X.XX (deepseek-v4-pro, N tool calls)
Team Bravo: $X.XX (deepseek-v4-pro, N tool calls)
Team Charlie: $X.XX (deepseek-v4-pro, N tool calls)
Integration: $X.XX (deepseek-v4-pro, N tool calls)
Total: $X.XX
Tracked via dedicated LiteLLM virtual key competitive-research-prod on admin-ai.
Historical Cost Baseline
| Batch | Date | Total Cost | Sites | Cost/Site | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 2026-08-10 | TBD | 20 | TBD | Initial batch |
Report Template
Each batch produces a master report at research/NNN-slug.md:
- Executive Summary (1 paragraph)
- Site-by-Site Breakdown (summary table)
- Feature Extraction Matrix (sortable table)
- Product Enhancement Recommendations (grouped by product, prioritized)
- New Product Opportunities (concept cards)
- Risk Flags & Warnings
- Cost Summary
- Next Batch Queue (sites flagged for future analysis)