SKILLEMALL.ai

AC ab-testing

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.

coreyhaines31/marketingskills Agent Skills author: coreyhaines31 MIT 4 files body ≈ 2 919 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 5 d ago

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program.

As a process C 54/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureData and analyticsResearchtype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
97/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
93
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
54/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 9): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 54/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 85Steps. 81 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2919 tokens
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
    • low 16 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • low No test case covers injection arriving through data

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 18 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 785: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 47 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 81 items
    • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 93.