Design rigorous A/B tests with hypotheses, variants, metrics, and sample size calculations.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Design a new PM skill through guided conversation. Use when you have raw content or an idea and want to shape it into a compliant skill.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Walk through the full skill design process interactively — from raw idea or content to a structured, repo-compliant SKILL.md draft. Asks adaptive questions to determine skill type, scope, structure, and content, then generates a ready-to-validate draft.
This skill sits with you and figures out what to build before you build it — shaping a raw idea or content into the right structure through conversation, then generating a draft you can validate.
Every skill requires these sections in order:
name: lowercase kebab-case, ≤ 64 charactersdescription: ≤ 200 characters, must include trigger cue ("Use when...")intent: longer repo-facing summary (no character limit)type: one of component, interactive, workflowRun this skill as a guided conversation using this interaction protocol:
Context Q1/5).Other (specify) when useful.This interactive skill asks up to 5 adaptive questions, then delivers a complete SKILL.md draft with frontmatter, all required sections, and repo-compliant structure.
Agent says:
"I'll help you design a new PM skill from scratch. This takes about 10-15 minutes and up to 5 questions. How do you want to start?
Agent asks:
"What are we turning into a skill? Give me whatever you have."
Or describe what you have in your own words.
Agent note: If the user pastes raw content instead of choosing an option, analyze the content and infer the answer. Confirm your interpretation before proceeding.
Based on Q1 answer, agent recommends a type and confirms:
If Q1 = Framework or Template:
"This sounds like a component skill — a self-contained artifact or reference. It would include a template, quality criteria, and examples. Does that fit, or is there a conversational/adaptive element I'm missing?
If Q1 = Process or Workflow:
"This sounds like a workflow skill — a multi-phase process. Does it reference or orchestrate other discrete skills/artifacts, or is it more of a guided conversation?
If Q1 = Coaching or Advisory:
"This sounds like an interactive skill — guided questions that adapt based on answers, ending with enumerated recommendations. Sound right?
Agent asks:
"What should we call this skill? I need two things:
a) A working name — lowercase-kebab-case, max 64 characters (e.g., feature-investment-advisor, user-story, discovery-process)
b) A one-sentence description — What it does + when to use it. Must fit in 200 characters and start with a verb or 'Use when...'
Give me your best attempt and I'll tighten it if needed. Or just describe the skill's purpose and I'll propose both."
Agent note: Validate the name format (kebab-case, ≤ 64 chars) and description length (≤ 200 chars) before proceeding. If either fails, suggest a fix.
This question adapts based on skill type from Q2:
For component skills:
"What are the core elements of this artifact or framework? I need:
Give me whatever you have — bullet points, rough notes, or a full draft."
For interactive skills:
"Walk me through the conversation flow:
Give me the decision tree as you see it — even if it's rough."
For workflow skills:
"Map out the phases:
Give me the flow — sequential, branching, or both."
Agent asks:
"What goes wrong when people do this badly? I need 2-3 failure modes:
If you're not sure, tell me the most common mistake you've seen and I'll help structure it."
After collecting answers to Q1-Q5, the agent generates a complete SKILL.md draft including:
name, description, intent, type, best_for, scenarios, estimated_timeAgent says after generating:
"Here's your draft SKILL.md. Before we call it done:
name and description are present and within limits (name ≤ 64 chars kebab-case, description ≤ 200 chars with a "Use when..." trigger cue).Want me to adjust anything, or are you ready to validate?"
Q1: "1 — A framework. It's a 2x2 matrix for evaluating build-vs-buy decisions."
Q2: "1 — Yes, component."
Q3: "Name: build-vs-buy-matrix. Description: 'Evaluate build-vs-buy decisions using a 2x2 matrix of strategic value and implementation complexity. Use when choosing between building internally and buying a solution.'"
Q4: "The axes are strategic differentiation (low/high) and implementation complexity (low/high). Four quadrants: Buy (low/low), Partner (low/high), Build (high/low), Invest (high/high). Quality criteria: each quadrant has a clear decision rule and one example."
Q5: "Biggest mistake: treating it as a one-time decision. Consequence: you build something, market shifts, and you're stuck maintaining undifferentiated tech. Fix: revisit quarterly."
Output: Complete component skill with template, filled example, and the quarterly-review pitfall.
Q1: "4 — Coaching topic. Helping PMs navigate their first pricing conversation with leadership."
Q2: "1 — Yes, interactive."
Q3: "Name: pricing-conversation-advisor. Description: 'Prepare for your first pricing conversation with leadership. Use when presenting pricing changes or new monetization to executives.'"
Q4: "Opening question: What's the pricing change? Branches: new product pricing, price increase on existing, freemium-to-paid conversion, usage-based transition. Recommendations: data to bring, objection handling, framing strategies."
Q5: "Failure mode: 'Leading with the Number.' Consequence: executives fixate on the price point instead of the strategy. Fix: always lead with the business case and customer impact before revealing the number."
Output: Complete interactive skill with 3-question flow, 4 branches, and enumerated recommendations per branch.
Q1: "I want a skill that covers all of product strategy — vision, roadmaps, OKRs, prioritization, stakeholder alignment, and metrics."
Agent response: "That's 4-6 separate skills, not one. Let's pick the one that matters most right now and build that. Which piece is most urgent?
roadmap-planning)prioritization-advisor)Start with one. We can build the others after."
Symptom: Calling something a "workflow" when it's really a template with numbered steps.
Consequence: Over-engineered skill that references non-existent sub-skills and confuses users.
Fix: Apply the type decision questions from Q2 honestly. If it doesn't orchestrate other skills or have distinct phases with different inputs/outputs, it's probably a component.
Symptom: Description says what the skill is ("A framework for pricing decisions") but not when to use it.
Consequence: Claude can't match user requests to the skill. It sits unused.
Fix: Every description must answer "Use when..." — e.g., "Evaluate pricing decisions using a structured framework. Use when choosing between pricing models or preparing a pricing proposal."
Symptom: "The draft looks good, let's ship it."
Consequence: Broken frontmatter, missing sections, failed cross-references, inconsistent catalog counts.
Fix: Always validate the draft's frontmatter and confirm all required sections are present before considering the skill done. No exceptions.
Symptom: Trying to pack an entire domain into one skill.
Consequence: A 500-line monster that does nothing well. Too broad to trigger accurately, too long to be useful.
Fix: One skill = one job. If you need more than 6 application steps or more than 4 branches, you probably need multiple skills.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Design rigorous A/B tests with hypotheses, variants, metrics, and sample size calculations.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program," or "experiment playbook." Use this whenever someone is comparing two approaches and wants to measure which performs better, or when they want to build a systematic experimentation practice. For tracking implementation, see analytics. For page-level conversion optimization, see cro.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Format CVs for academic positions with publications, grants, and teaching
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Conduct a comprehensive accessibility audit against WCAG guidelines with severity ratings and remediation steps.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Create accessibility testing plans covering assistive technologies and WCAG criteria.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
When the user wants to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative — headlines, descriptions, primary text, or full ad variations — for any paid advertising platform. Also use when the user mentions 'ad copy variations,' 'ad creative,' 'generate headlines,' 'RSA headlines,' 'bulk ad copy,' 'ad iterations,' 'creative testing,' 'ad performance optimization,' 'write me some ads,' 'Facebook ad copy,' 'Google ad headlines,' 'LinkedIn ad text,' or 'I need more ad variations.' Use this whenever someone needs to produce ad copy at scale or iterate on existing ads. For campaign strategy and targeting, see ads. For landing page copy, see copywriting.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。