agentleFS
ChykalophiaChykalophia/cro-research-reporting/skills/getting-started/SKILL.md

getting-started

Skill1 starsChanged 29 days agoMITView on GitHub

This is the front door to the CRO, research & reporting toolkit. Use it FIRST when someone is getting started, is unsure which skill to use, or makes a broad/vague request. Trigger phrases: "where do I start", "what can this do", "how do I use this", "get started", "set up", "onboard me", "help me with my store/page/campaign", "what should I focus on", "I don't know where to begin". It orients the user, captures a reusable engagement brief, and routes to the right skill, command, or agent.

32 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 32 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Before doing real work, establish the shared context every other skill reads first.

    line 24
  2. Very specific:

    Look for an existing brief at ./cro-engagement.md (the default.

    line 25
  3. Very specific:

    If absent and the task is more than a one-off, offer to capture one.

    line 26
  4. Very specific:

    Write/update ./cro-engagement.md from the template.

    line 35
  5. Distinctive:

    Don't interrogate the user — ask only the brief questions that matter for the task at hand, and infer the rest.

    line 60

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 32 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Getting Started (begin here)

The front door. Orient the user, capture a reusable engagement brief, then route to the right tool. Run this whenever someone is starting, is unsure which skill applies, or asks something broad.

What this toolkit does (say this plainly)

A strategist's kit to: audit a conversion funnel, research customers, plan and read out tests, run deep sourced research, write conversion copy, sharpen positioning/outbound, and turn it into polished reports + redesign blueprints, with a verifier that checks the work before it ships. It uses AI where the evidence says AI is reliable (coding feedback, checking pages against fixed rules, drafting variants, running the maths) and keeps judgement calls with you.

Step 1 — Engagement brief (persistent context)

Before doing real work, establish the shared context every other skill reads first.

  1. Look for an existing brief at ./cro-engagement.md (the default; or ask the user for the path). If present, read it, summarize it back in 2–3 lines, and ask if anything changed.
  2. If absent and the task is more than a one-off, offer to capture one. Ask only what's needed (skip anything already obvious from the request), using references/engagement-brief-template.md:
    • Client / brand and what they sell; price tier (mass / premium / luxury).
    • ICP (who buys, what they value).
    • Surface in scope (PDP / collection / cart / checkout / landing / lead-gen / SaaS signup / whole funnel).
    • Primary goal & metric (e.g., add-to-cart rate, RPV, lead conversion).
    • Brand voice & tokens (tone, banned words, colors/fonts/logo if known).
    • Connected data/tools (analytics/Shopify MCP, web search, theme/codebase access), the testing tool, and traffic per key template.
    • Research assets (review export, tickets, past surveys, recordings) and the test log path.
    • Known constraints (timeline, what's off-limits, who the audience for deliverables is).
  3. Write/update ./cro-engagement.md from the template. Keep it short and current; confirm before overwriting.

Why: the skills are most powerful when they share one context (so they stop re-asking and stay consistent). This is the coherence layer for the whole suite.

Step 2 — Route to the right tool

Match the user's intent to a component using references/routing-map.md. Quick version:

  • "Why isn't this converting / audit this page or funnel" → /cro-audit or the ecommerce-cro-audit skill (it can delegate to the cro-auditor agent).
  • "Research X thoroughly / with sources" → /deep-research or deep-research-synthesis (fans out deep-researcher agents).
  • "Turn this into a report / write it up" → /build-report or report-information-design (or the report-builder agent).
  • "What are customers saying / analyse reviews / survey questions / user test" → voc-research (bulk coding via the voc-coder agent).
  • "Plan / size / read out a test", "how long should it run", "did it win" → /experiment or experiment-design.
  • "Write/rewrite copy, headline, CTA, email, ad" → conversion-copywriting.
  • "Cold outreach, follow-up cadence, positioning, value prop, qualify a deal" → outbound-and-positioning.
  • "Check this before it ships" → the cro-verifier agent.

Step 3 — Show the recommended end-to-end flow

For a full engagement, the canonical path is: Brief (this skill) → /cro-audit (funnel data + rendered checklist + customer evidence → evidence-tagged hypotheses, test plans, report, verification) → copy variants → /experiment readout + test log. Offer to kick off the first step.

Reference map

  • references/engagement-brief-template.md — the brief template, field definitions, where it lives, and update cadence.
  • references/routing-map.md — full intent → skill/command/agent map and the end-to-end playbook.

Guardrails

Don't interrogate the user — ask only the brief questions that matter for the task at hand, and infer the rest. Don't overwrite an existing brief without confirming. If the user clearly already knows what they want, skip the orientation and route straight there.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.