Competitor watch

Each week the automation visits the competitor pages you care about, compares them against the last snapshot, logs any genuine change in Airtable with the before and after, and posts a short digest of what moved to Slack.

You find out about changes because the watch is running, not because a customer mentioned it.

Scoped access

• Web search, read-only monitoring
• Airtable, log changes
• Slack, post the digest

How it fails silently

Competitor watch fails silently by mistaking presentation for substance. The page now shows prices in a different currency because of where the request came from, or a limited-time promo banner is reading as the new standard price. The automation logs a dramatic change and posts that a competitor slashed prices. It did not. The digest looks like sharp intel, the team reacts, and the conclusion was an artifact of how the page rendered, not a real move. The change was logged, the run was green, and the only thing wrong was that it was not true.

What the overseer catches

After the agent records a change, the overseer looks at what actually moved between this snapshot and the last. When the drop is really a different currency, or a limited-time promo reading as the new list price, it flags that change as a likely artifact, so you learn the digest was off instead of acting on a move that never happened.

Stable weeks and clear, verifiable changes are logged and digested automatically, with nothing asked of you.

What gets flagged for a human glance is the suspicious swing: the change that could be a currency or promo artifact, the page that did not render cleanly. Those are called out in the digest as needs-checking, so a false alarm is something you catch rather than act on.