- name
- Amazon Competitor Intelligence Monitor
- version
- 1.1.1
- description
- >
- author
- SerendipityOneInc
- homepage
- https://github.com/SerendipityOneInc/APIClaw-Skills
- metadata
- {"openclaw": {"requires": {"env": ["APICLAW_API_KEY"]}, "primaryEnv": "APICLAW_API_KEY"}}
APIClaw — Competitor Intelligence Monitor
Know your enemy. Two modes: Full Scan + Quick Check. Respond in user's language.
Files
| File | Purpose |
|---|---|
{skill_base_dir}/scripts/apiclaw.py | Execute for all API calls (run --help for params) |
{skill_base_dir}/references/reference.md | Load for exact field names or response structure |
{skill_base_dir}/monitor-data/ | Runtime storage (auto-created): config.json, baseline.json, history/, alerts.json |
Credential
Required: APICLAW_API_KEY. Get free key at apiclaw.io/api-keys.
Input
Required: keyword or ASIN(s). Optional: my_asin, competitor_asins, brand. If only ASIN given → derive keyword via product --asin then ask user to confirm. Brand queries MUST also include confirmed --category.
API Pitfalls (CRITICAL)
- Category auto-detection: categoryPath is auto-detected from keyword, ASIN, or top search result. If
category_sourcein output isinferred_from_search, MUST confirm with user before trusting results - All keyword-based endpoints MUST include
--category; ASIN-specific endpoints do NOT need it - Brand + category: a brand sells across categories — only analyze within locked subcategory
- Use API fields directly: revenue=
sampleAvgMonthlyRevenue(NEVER price×sales), sales=monthlySalesFloor, concentration=sampleTop10BrandSalesRate - reviews/analysis: needs 50+ reviews; fallback to ratingBreakdown from realtime/product
Mode Selection
- Full Scan (~28-35 credits): First run, no baseline.json, explicit request, or weekly refresh
- Quick Check (~5-10 credits): Cron trigger, baseline exists, "check competitors"
Full Scan Flow
competitor-analysis --keyword X [--category Y] [--my-asin Z](composite, auto-detects category)- If
category_sourceisinferred_from_search, confirm with user before presenting results - Analyze & score → save baseline to
{skill_base_dir}/monitor-data/→ offer Auto-Monitor
Quick Check Flow
- Load config.json + baseline.json from
{skill_base_dir}/monitor-data/(missing → fall back to Full Scan) - Poll
product --asin {asin}for each tracked ASIN - Diff against baseline with tiered alerts → update baseline → offer Auto-Monitor
Alert Tiers
| 🔴 Critical | 🟡 Watch | 🟢 Opportunity |
|---|---|---|
| Price change > threshold | FBA↔FBM switch | Competitor stock-out |
| BSR crash > threshold | Rating change | Bullet/image changes |
| Buy Box owner changed | Abnormal review growth | Variant added/removed |
| Title modified |
Competitive Score (per competitor, 1-100)
| Dimension | Weight | 80-100 (Strong) | 50-79 (Moderate) | 0-49 (Weak) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sales Dominance | 25% | Top 3 in category, >5K units/mo 📊 | Top 20, 1K-5K units/mo 📊 | Below Top 20, <1K units/mo 📊 |
| Brand Strength | 20% | Brand in CR10, 5+ SKUs, wide price range 📊 | Known brand, 2-4 SKUs 📊 | Unknown brand, single SKU 📊 |
| Listing Quality | 20% | 7+ images, 5 bullets, A+, optimized title 📊 | 5-6 images, basic bullets 📊 | <5 images, weak bullets, no A+ 📊 |
| Customer Satisfaction | 20% | Rating ≥4.5, <3% 1-star, positive sentiment 📊 | 4.0-4.4, 3-8% 1-star 📊 | <4.0 or >8% 1-star 📊 |
| Trend Momentum | 15% | BSR improving 30d, sales growth >10% 🔍 | BSR stable, flat sales 🔍 | BSR declining, sales drop 🔍 |
Competitive Threat Level
| Total Score | Threat | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| 80-100 | 🔴 Dominant | Hard to compete head-on; find differentiation or avoid price band 💡 |
| 50-79 | 🟡 Competitive | Beatable with better listing, pricing, or reviews 💡 |
| 0-49 | 🟢 Vulnerable | Weak competitor; opportunity to capture share 💡 |
Market Structure Analysis
- CR10 > 70%: Concentrated market — new entrants need strong differentiation or niche positioning 🔍
- CR10 40-70%: Moderately competitive — room for well-positioned products 🔍
- CR10 < 40%: Fragmented — opportunity for brand building 🔍
- Top brand share > 25%: Category leader dominance — avoid direct competition in their price band 💡
- New SKU rate > 15%: Active market with frequent new entrants 📊
- New SKU rate < 5%: Mature/stagnant market, high barriers 🔍
Auto-Monitor Prompt
After EVERY run, offer: "Set up automatic monitoring? I can generate a scheduled Quick Check." Provide platform-specific setup (OpenClaw /cron, ChatGPT Scheduled Tasks, Claude Projects).
Output Spec
Full Scan sections: Battlefield Overview → Competitor Matrix → Brand Power Ranking → Price Map → 30-Day Trends → Review Battle → Listing Audit → Competitive Scores → Battle Strategy → Data Provenance → API Usage.
Language (required)
Output language MUST match the user's input language. If the user asks in Chinese, the entire report is in Chinese. If in English, output in English. Exception: API field names (e.g. monthlySalesFloor, categoryPath), endpoint names, technical terms (e.g. ASIN, BSR, CR10, FBA, credits) remain in English.
Disclaimer (required, at the top of every report)
Data is based on APIClaw API sampling as of [date]. Monthly sales (monthlySalesFloor) are lower-bound estimates. This analysis is for reference only and should not be the sole basis for business decisions. Validate with additional sources before acting.Confidence Labels (required, tag EVERY conclusion)
- 📊 Data-backed — direct API data (e.g. "CR10 = 54.8% 📊")
- 🔍 Inferred — logical reasoning from data (e.g. "brand concentration is moderate 🔍")
- 💡 Directional — suggestions, predictions, strategy (e.g. "consider entering $10-15 band 💡")
Rules: Strategy recommendations are NEVER 📊. Anomalies (>200% growth) are always 💡. User criteria override AI judgment.
Data Provenance (required)
Include a table at the end of every report:
| Data | Endpoint | Key Params | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| (e.g. Market Overview) | markets/search | categoryPath, topN=10 | 📊 Top N sampling, sales are lower-bound |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
Extract endpoint and params from _query in JSON output. Add notes: sampling method, T+1 delay, realtime vs DB, minimum review threshold, etc.
API Usage (required)
| Endpoint | Calls | Credits |
|---|---|---|
| (each endpoint used) | N | N |
| Total | N | N |
Extract from meta.creditsConsumed per response. End with Credits remaining: N.
API Budget
Full Scan: ~28-35 credits (all 11 endpoints via composite). Quick Check: ~5-10 credits (realtime/product × N ASINs).