본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

persona-updater

Update user personas from new feedback, pilot data, or research. Use this skill when: - New pilot data or feedback reveals changed user behaviors or pain points - Annual persona review is due (1-2x per year) - New user segments are discovered that need persona documentation - Existing personas need validation against recent data

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md4.1 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Persona Updater

Systematically update user persona files when new data (pilot observations, feedback, research) reveals changes in user behaviors, pain points, goals, or context. Generates diffs and preserves existing persona structure.

When to Use

  • After pilot rounds with new user observations (1-2x per year)
  • After significant feedback collection rounds
  • When expanding to new user segments or geographies
  • During annual persona review cycles

Workflow

  1. Read existing personas — Load all persona files from your persona directory
  2. Read new data sources — Pilot debrief reports, feedback, research
  3. Compare — Identify what's new, changed, or no longer relevant
  4. Generate diff — Structured change list per persona
  5. Propose updates — Show the diff to the user for approval
  6. Apply updates — Edit persona files preserving existing structure

Persona Dimensions to Track

DimensionWhat to Look For
DemographicsAge range, role, geography, segment
GoalsWhat they're trying to achieve
Pain PointsCurrent frustrations and blockers
BehaviorsHow they use the product, daily routines, device usage
ContextEnvironment, connectivity, device type
MotivationsWhat drives engagement
BarriersWhat prevents usage
Mental ModelsHow they think about the domain

Output Format

# Persona Update Report

**Date:** {DD-MM-YYYY}
**Data Sources:** {list sources reviewed}
**Personas Reviewed:** {count}
**Changes Found:** {count}

---

## Persona: {Persona Name} ({file path})

### New Findings

| # | Dimension | Finding | Source | Confidence |
|---|-----------|---------|--------|-----------|
| 1 | Pain Points | {new pain point discovered} | {source} | High/Med/Low |

### Changed Findings

| # | Dimension | Current Text | Proposed Update | Source | Rationale |
|---|-----------|-------------|-----------------|--------|-----------|
| 1 | Goals | "{current}" | "{updated}" | {source} | {why} |

### Removed / No Longer Relevant

| # | Dimension | Current Text | Reason for Removal | Source |
|---|-----------|-------------|-------------------|--------|
| 1 | Pain Points | "{old}" | Resolved by {feature} | {evidence} |

### No Change (Validated)

| # | Dimension | Current Text | Validation Source |
|---|-----------|-------------|------------------|
| 1 | Goals | "{goal}" | Confirmed in pilot |

---

## Summary

| Persona | New | Changed | Removed | Validated | Action |
|---------|-----|---------|---------|-----------|--------|
| {name} | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 | Update |

Update Rules

  1. Always generate the diff first — Never edit persona files without showing proposed changes
  2. Preserve existing structure — Match the heading hierarchy and writing style
  3. Mark confidence levels — Single observation is "Low"; data from 50 users is "High"
  4. Don't remove without evidence — Only mark as "no longer relevant" with explicit evidence
  5. Add source citations — Every change must cite where the new data came from
  6. Version the update — Add a note: Last updated: {date} — Source: {data source}
  7. Flag new segments — If data reveals uncovered user segments, flag as new persona candidates

Anti-Patterns

  • Don't update personas without new data — that's just editing, not updating
  • Don't merge multiple personas without evidence they overlap
  • Don't remove pain points just because a fix was shipped — verify the fix worked

Quality Checklist

  • Every change has a data source citation
  • Confidence levels marked on all findings
  • Diff shown to user before applying changes
  • Existing persona structure preserved
  • New segments flagged if discovered

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Design statistically rigorous experiments to test data science hypotheses. Use when the user says "design an A/B test", "run an experiment", "test this hypothesis", "is this difference significant", "how many samples do I need", "randomized controlled trial", "causal inference", "uplift test", "holdout group", "significance test", "power calculation", "avoid p-hacking", or needs to determine whether an observed effect is real before making a product or model decision. For lean build-measure-learn product experiments without the statistics, use experiment-design instead.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

qa-aman의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고