Install
$ agentstack add skill-mcgrass-ops-android-studio-pipeline-android-market-research ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Android Market Research
This is stage 1 of the Android app pipeline. It runs before planning. The job is to replace assumptions with evidence: what already exists in this category, what users actually complain about, how these apps make money, and where the opening is. Planning that starts from real market facts produces a far sharper product than planning from a one-sentence hunch.
Pipeline position:
> RESEARCH > planning -> monetization -> (replan) -> design -> MCP code -> polish
Stage 0 - right-size before you research
Before any searching, settle one thing: is this a quick/personal/throwaway build, or a product the user actually intends to ship? Ask if it is not obvious. The answer sets the depth of everything downstream:
- Quick / personal / utility: do a 5-10 minute pass - name 2-3 obvious incumbents and the one gap, skip sizing, ASO, and most of the brief. Do not spin a throwaway timer into a commercial product. Hand off a one-paragraph brief and move on.
- Real / shippable: run the full flow below.
Most over-scoping starts right here: an open prompt like "make a timer" is not permission to plan a startup. When in doubt, ask.
Core philosophy
- Evidence over intuition. Every claim in the brief should trace to something observed - an app on the store, a review, a pricing page, a search result. Don't invent market sizes.
- Competitors are free product research. For almost any idea, 3-7 apps already live in roughly that space. Study them. Steal what works, flip what's stale, attack what users hate.
- Reviews are the gap map. One- and two-star reviews of incumbents are where unmet needs hide. "I wish it could..." and "it keeps..." are gold.
- Research is scoped, not infinite. Aim for a tight, decision-useful brief, not a literature review. Stop when the picture is clear enough to plan against.
When this triggers
- "Build me an X app" -> research first, then hand to planning.
- "I have an idea for..." -> research.
- "Is there a market for..." / "who are the competitors for..." -> research, and you may stop at the brief if that's all they asked.
When NOT to trigger: work on an already-scoped project (bug fixes, a new screen, refactors), or pure design/style tweaks.
The research flow
Use WebSearch and web_fetch. Fan out several searches in parallel rather than one at a time.
- Name the category and the job. In one line, what is this app and what progress is the user hiring it to make? This frames every search.
- Find the incumbents - from primary sources, not listicles. Identify 3-7 real apps. Where you have browser tools, open the actual Play Store listing and read the live pricing and a real sample of recent reviews - that is primary evidence. Roundup articles are SEO listicles that cite each other; use them only to find candidates, never as the source of a fact. For each app capture: what it does, install scale / rating if visible, its live monetization, and one strength + one weakness.
- Mine the complaints - read real review text. Read actual one- and two-star reviews on the live Play listing (use the browser if available), plus Reddit/forum threads, for the top incumbents; quote the real wording where you can. Pull the recurring frustrations - these become the differentiation thesis.
- Survey monetization norms. What's standard in this category - free+ads, one-time, freemium subscription, IAP? Note typical price points. This pre-loads the monetization stage.
- Scan the ASO / keyword landscape. What terms would users search? Which are crowded, which look winnable? Note 5-10 candidate keywords.
- Flag risks. Market saturation, a dominant incumbent, platform/feasibility concerns (AI cost, hardware, fragmentation), or regulatory/compliance overhead (finance, health, kids).
Search breadth by ambition: a simple utility needs a light pass (steps 1-3); a crowded consumer or AI-native category needs the full six.
The research brief (output)
Produce a brief with these sections. Keep it to ~1-2 pages; cite sources inline.
- Category & job - one line each.
- Market snapshot - growing, saturated, or niche, with the evidence. If you cite any size/volume number, make it an explicit order-of-magnitude estimate and state the assumptions (e.g. "~X installs, inferred from rating counts"). Never present an estimate as a measured fact.
- Competitor table - 3-7 apps: what it does - strength - weakness - monetization.
- Unmet needs - the 3-5 recurring complaints / gaps, drawn from reviews.
- Differentiation thesis - the one-sentence opening this product could take.
- Monetization norms - what's standard + typical price points (feeds the monetization skill).
- ASO keywords - 5-10 candidate search terms, flagged crowded vs. winnable.
- Risks - market, feasibility, and compliance flags.
- Sources - linked.
Sources and verification (required). The brief is not finished without a linked Sources section. Tag every factual or quantitative claim [verified] (you opened the live source - link it) or [unverified] (listicle, memory, or estimate). If you could not verify something, say so plainly rather than state it with false confidence - a confident brief with zero citations is exactly the failure to prevent.
Hand-off to planning
After the brief is confirmed, hand to android-product-planning. The brief sharpens the planning questions: the competitor table and unmet-needs list feed the "reference apps" and JTBD steps; the monetization norms pre-load the monetization question; the risks feed the coherence checks and pre-mortem.
If the research shows the idea is already well-served with no clear opening, say so plainly before planning - it's cheaper to learn that here than after five screens are built.
Reference apps will date
Anything found on the store reflects today. Re-run the search rather than trusting a cached memory of a category; rankings, pricing, and feature sets move fast.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: Mcgrass-ops
- Source: Mcgrass-ops/android-studio-pipeline
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.