Picking what to build next is the part of running a side project I'm worst at. Open the issue tracker, stare at it, close the issue tracker. Repeat next weekend.
A few weeks ago I tried something different: instead of asking myself, I asked the people who already left a competitor. There's a specific kind of useful buried in a 1-star G2 review — someone took the time to write down what they wanted and didn't get. That's a roadmap. The problem is reading hundreds of them.
So I built GapHunter, a Claude Code skill that does it for me.
You run it like this:
/gaphunter DBeaver TablePlus
It searches G2, Capterra, TrustRadius, Reddit, GitHub Issues and Hacker News in parallel, clusters near-duplicate complaints (so "no dark mode" and "lacks dark theme" collapse into one finding), then reads your own repo : package.json, Cargo.toml, the src/ tree — and cross-references the gaps against what you've already shipped.
The output is two paired files in docs/: a JSON sidecar and a self-contained HTML report you just double-click. Tabs for Summary, Quick Wins (high priority × small effort, the obvious place to start), a Comparison matrix if you ran it against multiple competitors, and a Plan tab that lists implementation steps and the files in your repo to touch for each finding.
It's not perfect. Sources occasionally 403, the semantic clustering still groups things it shouldn't sometimes, and it can't see private repos of the competitors (oviously). But the first time I ran it I had a one-page list of things people are actively complaining about not having in tools I compete with — annotated with which ones I'd already implemented. A couple of hours of manual research, one command.
The skill itself, the HTML viewer, the CSS: all of it was written inside Claude Code. MIT licensed if you want to fork it or steal the template.