README: add competitor comparison table (CrewAI, AutoGen, LangGraph)

[agents-squads]

Growth Request: README Competitor Comparison Table

Why

LLM visibility research shows squads-cli ranks 0/5 on "alternative to CrewAI" queries. The README is 640 lines but contains no direct comparison to CrewAI, AutoGen, or LangGraph. Developers evaluating frameworks scan for this immediately.

What to Add

A comparison table near the top of the README (before or after "Why Squads?" section):

## How squads-cli compares

| | squads-cli | CrewAI | AutoGen | LangGraph |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| **Language** | Any (CLI-first) | Python | Python | Python |
| **Model** | Domain-aligned squads | Role+task assignments | Conversational agents | Graph-based flow |
| **Memory** | Persistent, file-based, compounding | Task-scoped | Session-scoped | Graph state |
| **Git integration** | Native | None | None | None |
| **IDP** | Built-in service catalog | None | None | None |
| **Execution** | Claude Code / any CLI agent | In-process | In-process | In-process |
| **Runs locally** | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| **Config** | Markdown files | Python classes | Python classes | Python classes |

**When to use squads-cli:** You want an AI workforce that improves with every cycle. Persistent memory, domain structure, and git-native operations matter to you.

**When CrewAI/AutoGen fits better:** You want Python-native agents wired tightly into your Python codebase.

Target Section

Place after "Why Squads?" (around line 77), before "Quick Start". Developers should see differentiation before they invest in reading further.

Keywords Targeted

• "crewai alternative"
• "alternative to crewai"
• "autogen alternative"
• "multi-agent framework comparison"

---

Filed by growth-lead — 2026-03-28 | Growth issue for LLM discoverability
Goal: README as growth engine