agentleFS
Layneformalized225Layneformalized225/ai-cofounder/skills/hypothesis-tracker/SKILL.md

hypothesis-tracker

Skill1 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Add, update, review, and kill hypotheses using CEO Bible framework

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

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

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    If the founder asks to add a 4th active hypothesis -> ask: "Which of the current ones are you pausing or killing?"

    line 17
  2. Very specific:

    Don't wait for the deadline.

    line 23
  3. Distinctive:

    Prefer hypotheses touching painful, frequent problem in core wedge

    line 81
  4. Distinctive:

    Prefer tests that can change a major decision quickly

    line 82
  5. Distinctive:

    Every experiment must contain:

    line 87
  6. Very specific:

    Update MEMORY.md if the hypothesis affected wedge/stage

    line 124
  7. Distinctive:

    Follow output preferences from USER.md.

    line 126

≈ “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.

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

Hypothesis Tracker

Hypothesis management per CEO Bible Section J.

WIP Limits (Critical Chain)

  • Max active hypotheses: 3
  • Max concurrent experiments: 2
  • Stagger rule: do not start a new experiment until the bottleneck step of the current one is complete

If the founder asks to add a 4th active hypothesis -> ask: "Which of the current ones are you pausing or killing?"

Reason: each parallel project doubles the lead time of all others (Goldratt Critical Chain). Less WIP = faster throughput.

Relay Race (Critical Chain)

Don't wait for the deadline. If evidence is sufficient for a decision (keep/kill/reframe) BEFORE the timebox — decide now.

On every hypothesis update, check: "Is there enough data for a decision already?" If yes -> flag: "H00X has sufficient evidence. Relay race — decide now."

Commands

The founder may say:

  • "new hypothesis: ..." -> add (check WIP limit!)
  • "update hypothesis X: ..." -> update status/result
  • "kill hypothesis X: ..." -> close with reason
  • "show hypotheses" -> list active ones
  • "rank hypotheses" -> re-sort by ELV

Hypothesis Format (Bible J)

For [ICP] who [trigger/problem], if we change [message / offer / product step / pricing / channel], then [metric] will move from X to Y by [date], because [evidence].

Structure in memory/hypotheses.json

{
  "hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "H001",
      "created": "2026-03-15",
      "status": "active",
      "statement": "For [ICP] who [trigger/problem], if we [change], then [metric] will move from X to Y within 30 days, because [evidence].",
      "icp": "[Your ICP description]",
      "change": "[What you're changing]",
      "metric": "[Key metric]",
      "baseline": null,
      "target": null,
      "deadline": "2026-04-15",
      "earliest_decision_possible": null,
      "evidence_tier": 4,
      "elv_score": null,
      "on_constraint": true,
      "result": null,
      "decision": null,
      "killed_reason": null
    }
  ]
}

Signal Tiers (for evidence quality scoring)

  1. Tier 1: costly-to-fake behavioral (paid pilots, expansion, integration, renewals)
  2. Tier 2: product/onboarding evidence (session replays, drop-offs, support tickets)
  3. Tier 3: commercial evidence (win/loss, objections, stalled deals)
  4. Tier 4: market narrative (competitor moves, content performance, search behavior)
  5. Tier 5: low-power (praise, vanity traffic, investor excitement)

ELV Score (Expected Learning Value)

ELV = (pain severity x frequency x wedge fit x evidence quality x strategic leverage) / time-to-learning

In practice:

  • Prefer hypotheses touching painful, frequent problem in core wedge
  • Prefer tests that can change a major decision quickly
  • Deprioritize elegant ideas that take months to disprove

Experiment Design (when creating hypothesis)

Every experiment must contain:

  • target cohort
  • hypothesis statement
  • exact metric
  • baseline
  • success threshold
  • timebox
  • owner
  • what would falsify it
  • what decision follows each outcome

Good vs Bad Experiment Types

Good pre-PMF:

  • message tests, onboarding/TTFV tests, core workflow simplification, pricing framing, pilot design, PQL handoff, founder outbound, proof asset tests

Bad pre-PMF:

  • broad brand campaigns, "viral" growth hacks, complex pricing overhauls without usage proof, feature programs with no decision question

Readout Rules

Experiment produces real learning only if it changes one of:

  • who you target
  • what you promise
  • what users must do first
  • what sales motion you use
  • what you price/package
  • what you stop building

A test that moves a CTR but doesn't change a real decision = activity, not learning.

When Updating a Hypothesis

Log:

  • Result (data)
  • Decision (keep / kill / reframe)
  • What changed in the company as a result
  • Update MEMORY.md if the hypothesis affected wedge/stage

Follow output preferences from USER.md.

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.