Optimize skill files for AI agent use with progressive disclosure

- Fix marketplace.json: add 2 missing skills (content-strategy, product-marketing-context)
- Refactor 10 skills over 500 lines to use references/ folders:
  - email-sequence: 926 → 291 lines
  - social-content: 809 → 276 lines
  - competitor-alternatives: 750 → 253 lines
  - pricing-strategy: 712 → 226 lines
  - programmatic-seo: 628 → 235 lines
  - referral-program: 604 → 239 lines
  - schema-markup: 598 → 175 lines
  - free-tool-strategy: 576 → 176 lines
  - paywall-upgrade-cro: 572 → 224 lines
  - marketing-ideas: 566 → 165 lines

Each skill now has core workflow in SKILL.md (<500 lines) with detailed
content in references/ folder for progressive disclosure.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

skills/competitor-alternatives/references/templates.md

@@ -0,0 +1,212 @@
+# Section Templates for Competitor Pages
+
+Ready-to-use templates for each section of competitor comparison pages.
+
+## TL;DR Summary
+
+Start every page with a quick summary for scanners:
+
+```markdown
+**TL;DR**: [Competitor] excels at [strength] but struggles with [weakness].
+[Your product] is built for [your focus], offering [key differentiator].
+Choose [Competitor] if [their ideal use case]. Choose [You] if [your ideal use case].
+```
+
+---
+
+## Paragraph Comparison (Not Just Tables)
+
+For each major dimension, write a paragraph:
+
+```markdown
+## Features
+
+[Competitor] offers [description of their feature approach].
+Their strength is [specific strength], which works well for [use case].
+However, [limitation] can be challenging for [user type].
+
+[Your product] takes a different approach with [your approach].
+This means [benefit], though [honest tradeoff].
+Teams who [specific need] often find this more effective.
+```
+
+---
+
+## Feature Comparison Section
+
+Go beyond checkmarks:
+
+```markdown
+## Feature Comparison
+
+### [Feature Category]
+
+**[Competitor]**: [2-3 sentence description of how they handle this]
+- Strengths: [specific]
+- Limitations: [specific]
+
+**[Your product]**: [2-3 sentence description]
+- Strengths: [specific]
+- Limitations: [specific]
+
+**Bottom line**: Choose [Competitor] if [scenario]. Choose [You] if [scenario].
+```
+
+---
+
+## Pricing Comparison Section
+
+```markdown
+## Pricing
+
+| | [Competitor] | [Your Product] |
+|---|---|---|
+| Free tier | [Details] | [Details] |
+| Starting price | $X/user/mo | $X/user/mo |
+| Business tier | $X/user/mo | $X/user/mo |
+| Enterprise | Custom | Custom |
+
+**What's included**: [Competitor]'s $X plan includes [features], while
+[Your product]'s $X plan includes [features].
+
+**Total cost consideration**: Beyond per-seat pricing, consider [hidden costs,
+add-ons, implementation]. [Competitor] charges extra for [X], while
+[Your product] includes [Y] in base pricing.
+
+**Value comparison**: For a 10-person team, [Competitor] costs approximately
+$X/year while [Your product] costs $Y/year, with [key differences in what you get].
+```
+
+---
+
+## Service & Support Comparison
+
+```markdown
+## Service & Support
+
+| | [Competitor] | [Your Product] |
+|---|---|---|
+| Documentation | [Quality assessment] | [Quality assessment] |
+| Response time | [SLA if known] | [Your SLA] |
+| Support channels | [List] | [List] |
+| Onboarding | [What they offer] | [What you offer] |
+| CSM included | [At what tier] | [At what tier] |
+
+**Support quality**: Based on [G2/Capterra reviews, your research],
+[Competitor] support is described as [assessment]. Common feedback includes
+[quotes or themes].
+
+[Your product] offers [your support approach]. [Specific differentiator like
+response time, dedicated CSM, implementation help].
+```
+
+---
+
+## Who It's For Section
+
+```markdown
+## Who Should Choose [Competitor]
+
+[Competitor] is the right choice if:
+- [Specific use case or need]
+- [Team type or size]
+- [Workflow or requirement]
+- [Budget or priority]
+
+**Ideal [Competitor] customer**: [Persona description in 1-2 sentences]
+
+## Who Should Choose [Your Product]
+
+[Your product] is built for teams who:
+- [Specific use case or need]
+- [Team type or size]
+- [Workflow or requirement]
+- [Priority or value]
+
+**Ideal [Your product] customer**: [Persona description in 1-2 sentences]
+```
+
+---
+
+## Migration Section
+
+```markdown
+## Switching from [Competitor]
+
+### What transfers
+- [Data type]: [How easily, any caveats]
+- [Data type]: [How easily, any caveats]
+
+### What needs reconfiguration
+- [Thing]: [Why and effort level]
+- [Thing]: [Why and effort level]
+
+### Migration support
+
+We offer [migration support details]:
+- [Free data import tool / white-glove migration]
+- [Documentation / migration guide]
+- [Timeline expectation]
+- [Support during transition]
+
+### What customers say about switching
+
+> "[Quote from customer who switched]"
+> — [Name], [Role] at [Company]
+```
+
+---
+
+## Social Proof Section
+
+Focus on switchers:
+
+```markdown
+## What Customers Say
+
+### Switched from [Competitor]
+
+> "[Specific quote about why they switched and outcome]"
+> — [Name], [Role] at [Company]
+
+> "[Another quote]"
+> — [Name], [Role] at [Company]
+
+### Results after switching
+- [Company] saw [specific result]
+- [Company] reduced [metric] by [amount]
+```
+
+---
+
+## Comparison Table Best Practices
+
+### Beyond Checkmarks
+
+Instead of:
+| Feature | You | Competitor |
+|---------|-----|-----------|
+| Feature A | ✓ | ✓ |
+| Feature B | ✓ | ✗ |
+
+Do this:
+| Feature | You | Competitor |
+|---------|-----|-----------|
+| Feature A | Full support with [detail] | Basic support, [limitation] |
+| Feature B | [Specific capability] | Not available |
+
+### Organize by Category
+
+Group features into meaningful categories:
+- Core functionality
+- Collaboration
+- Integrations
+- Security & compliance
+- Support & service
+
+### Include Ratings Where Useful
+
+| Category | You | Competitor | Notes |
+|----------|-----|-----------|-------|
+| Ease of use | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | [Brief note] |
+| Feature depth | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | [Brief note] |