self-improver
Skill757 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Review affiliate campaign results and improve strategy. Triggers on: "review my results", "what went wrong", "how to improve conversions", "analyze my campaign", "affiliate retrospective", "why am I not converting", "improve my strategy", "what should I change", "campaign review", "optimize my approach", "learn from my results", "post-mortem on my campaign".
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- rrpauls/hermes-esratheir own version, first seen Sep 12, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- rrpauls/hermes-esra★ 1same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository55 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- affiliate-checkSkill
- ab-test-generatorSkill
- conversion-trackerSkill
- internal-linking-optimizerSkill
- performance-reportSkill
- seo-auditSkill
- content-repurposerSkill
- email-automation-builderSkill
- multi-program-managerSkill
- paid-ad-copy-writerSkill
- proprietary-data-generatorSkill
- affiliate-blog-builderSkill
- comparison-post-writerSkill
- content-decay-detectorSkill
- content-moat-calculatorSkill
- how-to-tutorial-writerSkill
- keyword-cluster-architectSkill
- listicle-generatorSkill
- content-pillar-atomizerSkill
- content-research-briefSkill
- infographic-generatorSkill
- reddit-post-writerSkill
- tiktok-script-writerSkill
- twitter-thread-writerSkill
- viral-post-writerSkill
- bio-link-deployerSkill
- email-drip-sequenceSkill
- github-pages-deployerSkill
- social-media-schedulerSkill
- bonus-stack-builderSkill
- grand-slam-offerSkill
- guarantee-generatorSkill
- landing-page-creatorSkill
- product-showcase-pageSkill
- squeeze-page-builderSkill
- value-ladder-architectSkill
- webinar-registration-pageSkill
- category-designerSkill
- compliance-checkerSkill
- create-skillSkill
- funnel-plannerSkill
- skill-finderSkill
- affiliate-program-searchSkill
- commission-calculatorSkill
- competitor-spySkill
- content-angle-rankerSkill
- find-and-verify-affiliate-programSkill
- monopoly-niche-finderSkill
- niche-opportunity-finderSkill
- purple-cow-auditSkill
- submit-programSkill
- traffic-analyzerSkill
- trending-content-scoutSkill
- your-skill-nameSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 65
Chaining context: If S6.3 (performance-report) was run in the same conversation, pull KPIs directly.
- Distinctive: line 81
Use industry benchmarks if user doesn't have expectations:
- Distinctive: line 123
Before presenting output, verify:
- Distinctive: line 131
If any check fails, fix the output before delivering.
- Very specific: line 209
All skills — improvement_suggestions drive quality upgrades across the system
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Self-Improver
Review affiliate campaign results, diagnose what worked and what didn't, and generate a prioritized improvement plan. Uses affiliate-specific diagnostic frameworks (offer-market fit, traffic-content match, funnel leak analysis) to identify root causes and actionable fixes.
Stage
S8: Meta — Most affiliates repeat the same mistakes because they never do structured retrospectives. Self-Improver closes the feedback loop: it takes your results, compares them to expectations, diagnoses gaps using affiliate-specific frameworks, and produces concrete actions that feed back into S1-S7 for the next iteration.
When to Use
- User has run a campaign and wants to understand results
- User's affiliate content isn't converting and wants to diagnose why
- User wants to compare actual vs expected results
- User says "what went wrong?", "why no conversions?", "how to improve?"
- User wants a structured retrospective on their affiliate efforts
- Chaining from S6.3 (performance-report) — analyze the data and plan improvements
Input Schema
campaign:
description: string # REQUIRED — what was done (e.g., "Published 3 blog reviews
# of AI video tools, shared on LinkedIn and Reddit")
duration: string # OPTIONAL — how long (e.g., "2 weeks", "1 month")
skills_used: string[] # OPTIONAL — which Affitor skills were used
channels: string[] # OPTIONAL — where content was distributed
results:
clicks: number # OPTIONAL — total clicks on affiliate links
conversions: number # OPTIONAL — total signups/purchases
revenue: number # OPTIONAL — total commission earned
traffic: number # OPTIONAL — total page views / impressions
feedback: string # OPTIONAL — qualitative feedback received
expectations:
expected_clicks: number # OPTIONAL — what was expected
expected_conversions: number # OPTIONAL
expected_revenue: number # OPTIONAL
benchmark: string # OPTIONAL — "industry average" or specific number
context:
niche: string # OPTIONAL — product category
experience: string # OPTIONAL — "first campaign" | "experienced"
budget: string # OPTIONAL — money spent (if any)Chaining context: If S6.3 (performance-report) was run in the same conversation, pull KPIs directly. If S1-S5 outputs exist in context, reference them for gap analysis.
Workflow
Step 1: Establish Baseline
Collect campaign description and results. If numbers are missing, work with whatever is available. State assumptions clearly: "You didn't share click data, so I'll focus on qualitative analysis."
Step 2: Compare Results vs Expectations
Calculate gaps:
- Traffic gap: Expected vs actual impressions/visits
- Click gap: Expected vs actual CTR
- Conversion gap: Expected vs actual conversion rate
- Revenue gap: Expected vs actual earnings
Use industry benchmarks if user doesn't have expectations:
- Affiliate blog CTR: 2-5%
- Affiliate conversion rate: 1-3%
- Social post engagement: 1-3% of impressions
- Email click rate: 2-5%
Step 3: Diagnose Root Causes
Apply affiliate-specific diagnostic frameworks:
Offer-Market Fit: Is the product right for the audience?
- Wrong audience for the product
- Product too expensive for the audience's budget
- Product solves a problem the audience doesn't have
Traffic-Content Match: Is the traffic source aligned with the content?
- Blog content promoted on TikTok (format mismatch)
- Reddit post that reads like an ad (platform mismatch)
- Cold traffic sent to a hard sell (temperature mismatch)
Funnel Leaks: Where do people drop off?
- High impressions but low clicks → weak headline/hook
- High clicks but low conversions → landing page or product issue
- High conversions but low revenue → wrong product (low commission)
Step 4: Prioritize Improvements
Rank each improvement by:
- Impact: How much would this change move the needle? (1-5)
- Effort: How hard is it to implement? (1-5)
- Priority: Impact / Effort ratio
Step 5: Create Iteration Plan
For each top improvement, specify:
- What to change
- Which Affitor skill to re-run
- Exact prompt modification for better results
- Expected improvement (realistic estimate)
Step 6: Self-Validation
Before presenting output, verify:
- Gap calculations accurate: expected minus actual
- Root causes are evidence-based, not speculation
- Impact (1-5) and effort (1-5) scores are justified with reasoning
- Next steps reference specific Affitor skills by name
- Iteration plan has concrete timeline and measurable success metric
If any check fails, fix the output before delivering. Do not flag the checklist to the user — just ensure the output passes.
Output Schema
output_schema_version: "1.0.0" # Semver — bump major on breaking changes
retrospective:
campaign: string
period: string
overall_assessment: string # "strong" | "average" | "needs_work" | "failing"
gaps:
- metric: string # e.g., "conversion_rate"
expected: string
actual: string
gap: string # e.g., "-2.5%"
diagnosis:
root_causes:
- cause: string # e.g., "Traffic-content mismatch"
evidence: string # what indicates this
severity: string # "high" | "medium" | "low"
improvements:
- action: string # what to do
skill: string # which Affitor skill to use
prompt: string # exact prompt for the skill
impact: number # 1-5
effort: number # 1-5
priority: number # impact / effort
iteration_plan:
next_steps: string[] # ordered list of actions
timeline: string # e.g., "1 week"
success_metric: string # how to measure improvementOutput Format
- Campaign Summary — what was done, results achieved
- Gap Analysis — table comparing expected vs actual metrics
- Root Cause Diagnosis — what's causing the gaps, with evidence
- Improvement Actions — prioritized table with action, skill, impact, effort
- Next Iteration Plan — ordered steps with timeline and success metrics
Error Handling
- No results data at all: "I need at least one data point to diagnose. Do you have: clicks, conversions, revenue, or even qualitative feedback (comments, reactions)? Even 'I got zero conversions' is useful data."
- Only qualitative data: Shift to qualitative analysis. "Without numbers, I'll focus on content quality, offer fit, and platform alignment. Here's what I can diagnose from your description."
- Unrealistic expectations: "You expected 100 sales from a single blog post in week 1. Industry average conversion rate is 1-3%, so 100 sales would require 3,000-10,000 clicks. Let me recalibrate your expectations and plan from there."
Examples
Example 1: Blog campaign with low conversions
User: "I wrote 3 blog reviews of AI tools last month. Got 2,000 visitors but only 2 conversions ($14 total). What went wrong?" Action: Conversion rate 0.1% vs benchmark 1-3%. Diagnose: possible funnel leak (weak CTAs? disclosure too prominent? wrong products for audience?). Check traffic sources (SEO cold traffic needs more warming). Recommend: S6 (ab-test-generator) on CTAs, S6 (seo-audit) on content quality, S4 (landing-page-creator) as intermediate step.
Example 2: Social campaign with zero clicks
User: "Posted 10 LinkedIn posts about Semrush. Lots of likes but nobody clicked my link." Action: Traffic-content mismatch. LinkedIn engagement ≠ clicks. Diagnose: link placement (probably in comments where nobody looks), content may be too educational without clear CTA, audience may not be in buying mode on LinkedIn. Recommend: S2 (viral-post-writer) with CTA-focused brief, S3 (affiliate-blog-builder) to create destination content, S7 (content-repurposer) to adapt for click-friendly platforms.
Example 3: Chained from performance-report
Context: S6.3 performance-report shows EPC of $0.02 across 5 programs, with one program at $0.15 EPC. User: "How do I improve these numbers?" Action: One program is 7x more profitable. Diagnose: concentrate effort on the winner. For the four underperformers, check offer-market fit (are these the wrong products?). Recommend: S7 (multi-program-manager) to restructure portfolio, S7 (content-repurposer) to create more content for the winning program, S6 (ab-test-generator) to optimize existing content.
References
shared/references/ftc-compliance.md— Referenced when reviewing content quality. Read in Step 3.docs/affiliate-funnel-overview.md— Funnel stage definitions for gap analysis. Read in Step 3.shared/references/flywheel-connections.md— master flywheel connection map
Flywheel Connections
Feeds Into
- All skills —
improvement_suggestionsdrive quality upgrades across the system
Fed By
performance-report(S6) — performance data revealing what needs improvementconversion-tracker(S6) — conversion trends for diagnosiscompliance-checker(S8) — compliance issues to address
Feedback Loop
- Each improvement cycle feeds back into the next self-improver run → track improvement trajectory over time
chain_metadata:
skill_slug: "self-improver"
stage: "meta"
timestamp: string
suggested_next:
- "funnel-planner"
- "performance-report"
- "skill-finder"Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

