Building the Brief: Drafting an Honest Comparison Page and Schema Spec
Objective: Given a raw feature-diff spreadsheet and a hub-page inventory for Mailchimp vs Klaviyo, produce a comparison-page content brief that maps features to bottom-of-funnel intent, plans hub-and-spoke internal linking, and specifies AI-citation-ready structured sentences and schema.
You're a content strategist at Mailchimp assigned to brief a new 'Mailchimp vs Klaviyo' comparison page, working from a raw feature-diff export and the existing comparison-hub's internal link map.
Decide which features earn a table row, plan where the new spoke page slots into the hub, and write the declarative, AI-extractable sentences the page needs.
Before you start
What you'll need
Free path (everything below is enough to finish)
Free, handles the row-tagging workflow entirely
Free up to 500 URLs, enough for one comparison hub cluster
Paid upgrades (optional, faster/deeper)
The free path (Sheets + Screaming Frog) covers the full brief; Clearscope just speeds up finding vague sentences in a long draft rather than reading it line by line.
Purpose-built for checking whether content reads as extractable, structured information
The process
3 steps
Step 01 of 03
The lesson defines bottom-of-funnel queries as searches from buyers who already understand their pain point and are actively evaluating specific tools, someone searching 'Klaviyo alternatives' wants a replacement now, not education.
The feature-diff export has 34 rows. Which ones belong in a BoFu comparison table versus a separate blog post?
Procedure
- Import feature-diff-export.csv and tag each row: decision-relevant or background-only
- Keep the 19 decision-relevant rows (pricing tiers, SMS support, ecommerce integrations, automation branching) for the comparison table
- Move the 15 background-only rows (company history, funding, founding year) out, they don't help a buyer decide
KEEP for table (19 rows, sample) SMS + email in one flow: Mailchimp partial / Klaviyo native Free tier contact cap: Mailchimp 500 / Klaviyo 250 CUT from table (15 rows, sample) Founded: Mailchimp 2001 / Klaviyo 2012
Healthy
The table only has rows a buyer would actually weigh before choosing; background facts move to a separate 'About' aside if they're kept at all.
Unhealthy
Including all 34 rows because the export had them, padding the table with facts nobody's deciding on.
What this means
A comparison table is a decision tool, not a data dump. Every row should answer 'does this change which tool I pick.'
So what do I do about it?
| Symptom | Action | Effort |
|---|---|---|
| A comparison table runs 30+ rows and buyers bounce before finishing it | Cut every row that doesn't change the decision | 30 min |
Step 02 of 03
The lesson's hub-and-spoke model has a comparison overview hub linking out to individual comparison pages, passing internal link equity across the cluster and signaling topical authority.
Mailchimp's existing hub links to 6 comparison pages. Where does the new Klaviyo spoke slot in, and what needs to link to it?
Procedure
- Crawl the /compare hub page and its 6 existing spoke pages
- Confirm the hub page's link list template can add a 7th entry without a manual code change
- Plan a link from the new Klaviyo spoke back to the hub, plus a link from Mailchimp's pricing page to the new spoke
Current hub links: 6 spokes, template-driven list Planned addition: 7th spoke (vs Klaviyo), auto-added via CMS entry New inbound link: pricing page → vs-klaviyo spoke (added manually)
Healthy
The new page is linked from the hub on day one and gets at least one additional inbound link from a high-traffic page, not left to rely on the sitemap alone.
Unhealthy
Publishing the new spoke page without adding it to the hub's link list, leaving it to be discovered only through search.
What this means
Internal links are what pass authority through the cluster. A spoke page with no hub link is competing on its own, not with the cluster's combined authority.
So what do I do about it?
| Symptom | Action | Effort |
|---|---|---|
| A new comparison page ranks slowly despite good content | Check it's linked from the hub and at least one other high-traffic page | 5 min |
Step 03 of 03
The lesson says AI models cite clear semantic headers, structured tables, and direct declarative sentences like 'Product X costs $49/month, Product Y costs $79/month,' not marketing language that requires interpretation.
The draft currently says 'Klaviyo's pricing can add up fast for growing lists.' How should that sentence be rewritten for AI extraction?
Procedure
- Run the draft through a content-structure check for vague, non-declarative claims
- Rewrite each flagged sentence into a direct comparison with real numbers
- Confirm the page includes a semantic H2 per comparison dimension and a comparison table, not just prose
BEFORE: "Klaviyo's pricing can add up fast for growing lists." AFTER: "Klaviyo's paid plans start at $20/month for 500 contacts and scale with list size; Mailchimp's paid plans start at $13/month for 500 contacts."
Healthy
Every claim in the comparison table and body copy is a specific, checkable statement an AI model could lift verbatim into an answer.
Unhealthy
Leaving vague qualitative claims ('can add up fast,' 'more flexible') that require a human to interpret before they're useful as a citation.
What this means
AI Overviews and chat answers extract sentences, not sentiment. A claim that needs interpretation gets skipped in favor of a competitor's page that states the number directly.
So what do I do about it?
| Symptom | Action | Effort |
|---|---|---|
| A comparison page ranks well but gets zero AI citations | Rewrite vague claims into direct, numbered statements | 30 min |
Final deliverable
A comparison-page content brief: a 19-row feature table spec, a hub-and-spoke linking plan naming exact source/target pages, and a rewritten set of AI-citation-ready declarative sentences with an FAQPage schema outline.
See a reference example
Squarespace vs Wix, comparison-page brief (excerpt) TABLE ROWS (decision-relevant, 4 of 19 shown) Free custom domain: Squarespace no / Wix yes (1 year) Built-in booking system: Squarespace yes / Wix add-on LINKING PLAN Hub: /compare (add 7th spoke entry via CMS) Inbound: /pricing page → new spoke (manual link) AI-CITATION SENTENCE "Squarespace's Business plan costs $23/month billed annually; Wix's comparable Core plan costs $17/month billed annually."
Success criteria
You're done when you can:
- Feature table only includes decision-relevant rows, background rows are excluded
- Linking plan names both the hub-to-spoke and at least one additional inbound link
- At least 3 vague claims are rewritten into specific, numbered declarative sentences