agentleFS
NexFabricNexFabric/lean-startup-skill/SKILL.md

lean-startup

Skill1 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub

Validates early-stage products and features under extreme uncertainty using Eric Ries's Lean Startup framework. Use for MVP scoping, Build-Measure-Learn cycle specs, vanity vs. actionable metric audits, and pivot-or-persevere decisions. Triggers: test idea fast, MVP design, vanity metrics, pivot or persevere, innovation accounting, build-measure-learn, fikri test etme, MVP tasarımı, vanity metric tuzağı, pivot kararı. Exclusions: Scaling proven PMF -> crossing-the-chasm; Interview script mechanics -> mom-test; Enterprise sales -> spin-selling; Pricing -> monetizing-innovation.

7 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use crossing-the-chasm, obviously-awesome and 1 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • wondelaiSkill

    crossing-the-chasm

    Navigate the technology adoption lifecycle from early adopters to mainstream market. Use when the user mentions "crossing the chasm", "beachhead segment", "whole product", "early adopters vs mainstream", "tech go-to-market", "bowling pin strategy", "technology adoption lifecycle", "pragmatist buyers", "growth stalled after early adopters", or "our go-to-market plan". Also trigger when planning go-to-market for a technical product. Covers the D-Day analogy, bowling-pin strategy, the tornado, and positioning against incumbents. For product positioning, see obviously-awesome. For new market creation, see blue-ocean-strategy.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • wondelaiSkill

    obviously-awesome

    Define product positioning by mapping competitive alternatives, unique attributes, and best-fit customers to the right market category. Use when the user mentions "positioning", "competitive alternatives", "how to position", "market category", "positioning canvas", "repositioning", "category creation", "what category are we in", or "why prospects dont get what we do". Also trigger when launching a new product, entering a crowded market, or diagnosing why prospects dont grasp the product''s value. Covers the positioning canvas and team workshops. For customer jobs analysis, see jobs-to-be-done. For go-to-market, see crossing-the-chasm.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • raphaelDkhnSkill

    mom-test

    Customer interview skill using Rob Fitzpatrick's Mom Test principles. Generates question lists grounded in past behavior (not future intent), bias-checks them (removes pitchy and leading questions), preps debriefs. The only worldbuilder skill that forces the user out of the chat and into the world. Use when asked to "customer interviews", "talk to users", "mom test", "interview questions", "user research", "who should I talk to", "how do I interview", or "validate with users". Proactively invoke this skill (do NOT answer directly) when the user wants to test a hypothesis with real humans, OR when the research-trap check is firing because the user hasn't talked to a human in days. Use after /hypothesis. (worldbuilder)

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

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

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Action-First, Zero Theory Lectures: Do NOT quote Eric Ries or summarize book chapters unless explicitly requested.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Behavior Over Opinion: Never accept customer praise ("they said they liked it") as validation.

    line 12
  3. Distinctive:

    Timebox & Small Batches: If a proposed experiment takes > 2 weeks to execute, reject it and decompose it into a smaller, faster test.

    line 13
  4. Distinctive:

    Establish Baseline: Test MVP with real cohort.

    line 92
  5. Distinctive:

    Pivot or Persevere: If tuning hits diminishing returns without reaching viability -> PIVOT.

    line 94

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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

The Lean Startup — Agent Skill

⚡ Operational Guardrails for AI Agents

  1. Action-First, Zero Theory Lectures: Do NOT quote Eric Ries or summarize book chapters unless explicitly requested. Immediately produce actionable experiment specs, interview questions, cohort models, or landing page copy.
  2. Mandatory Distribution Plan: An MVP with 0 traffic yields 0 data. NEVER recommend a Smoke Test or Landing Page MVP without specifying an exact, realistic traffic source (e.g., targeted subreddit, cold outbound list, ad campaign with budget, existing user base).
  3. Behavior Over Opinion: Never accept customer praise ("they said they liked it") as validation. Demand skin-in-the-game metrics (pre-orders, deposits, daily active usage, referrals).
  4. Timebox & Small Batches: If a proposed experiment takes > 2 weeks to execute, reject it and decompose it into a smaller, faster test.
  5. Statistical Rigor ($N \ge 30$): In small cohorts ($N < 30$), percentage-based split tests are statistical noise. Demand qualitative commitment signals (deposits, signed letters of intent, completed onboarding), NOT percentage conversion conclusions.
  6. Safety & Regulatory Boundaries: In regulated, clinical, safety-critical, or high-liability domains (medical, legal, financial custody), strictly forbid deceptive fake-door smoke tests. Use non-clinical workflow proxies or verified customer discovery.

📋 Mandatory Output Contracts

Whenever asked to test an idea, design an MVP, or evaluate metrics, output one of the following structured schemas. Do NOT output unstructured conversational essays.

Contract A: Experiment Specification (BML Loop Plan)

### 🧪 Experiment Spec: [Hypothesis Name]
**Cycle #**: [N] | **Timebox**: [Max 14 days] | **MVP Type**: [Smoke / Concierge / Wizard of Oz / Single-feature]

| Dimension | Specification |
|---|---|
| **Leap-of-Faith Hypothesis** | "We believe that [Customer Segment] will [Action/Commitment] because [Pain/Value]." |
| **Hypothesis Type** | [Value Hypothesis OR Growth Hypothesis] |
| **MVP Architecture** | [Concise execution steps: what is built vs. faked/manual] |
| **Target Traffic Source** | [Specific distribution channel: subreddit, cold outbound list, ad budget] |
| **Primary Metric** | [Actionable metric, e.g. % pre-orders from qualified visitors] |
| **Falsification Threshold** | [Hard FAIL number: e.g., "< 5% pre-order rate on N=100 qualified visitors = Invalidate"] |
| **Explicit Non-Goals** | [What will NOT be built during this test] |

Contract B: Pivot-or-Persevere Audit

### 🔄 Pivot-or-Persevere Audit: [Product Name]
**Current Status**: [Persevere / Pivot Required / Inconclusive]

1. **Baseline vs. Current Metric Movement**:
   - Target Assumption: [Assumption]
   - Baseline Metric: [Baseline] -> Current Level: [Current]
   - Convergence Trend: [Flatlined / Diminishing Returns / Accelerating]
2. **Tuning Exhaustion Analysis**:
   - Have micro-optimizations (copy tweaks, UI button changes) failed to alter cohort retention? [Yes/No]
3. **Runway Assessment**:
   - Remaining Cash / Time: [X months]
   - Calculated Pivots Remaining: [Runway / Time-per-Pivot-Cycle]
4. **Prescribed Action**:
   - If Pivot: Select 1 of 10 types [Zoom-in, Zoom-out, Customer Segment, Customer Need, Platform, Architecture, Value Capture, Engine, Channel, Tech] with rationale.

Should You Use This Skill?

Are you building something under conditions of extreme uncertainty?
|-- YES --> Do you know who your customers are?
|   |-- NO  --> Start with Four Steps (Customer Discovery), use Lean
|   |           Startup for iteration speed within that process
|   +-- YES --> Do you have product/market fit?
|               |-- NO  --> THIS SKILL. Build-Measure-Learn loop.
|               +-- YES --> Use Crossing the Chasm for mainstream scaling
+-- NO  --> Are you optimizing an existing product in a known market?
            |-- YES --> Lean Startup principles apply (small batches, Five Whys)
            +-- NO  --> Rethink what you're doing

Core Mental Models & Rules of Thumb

The Two Leap-of-Faith Assumptions

AssumptionCore QuestionValidation Method
Value hypothesisDoes the product deliver value once used?Retention, repeat usage, willingness to pay
Growth hypothesisHow will new customers discover the product?Sustainable engine mechanics (churn, viral $k$, LTV/CPA)

The Three Engines of Growth (Focus on ONE)

EngineCore MetricGrowth ConditionAnti-Pattern
StickyChurn rateAcquisition > ChurnSpending on ads before fixing 15% monthly churn
ViralViral coefficient ($k$)$k > 1.0$Forcing viral loops onto confidential B2B enterprise software
PaidCPA vs. LTV$(\text{Gross Margin} \times \text{LTV}) > \text{CPA}$Scaling paid spend with negative gross margins or token burn

Innovation Accounting: Three Milestones

  1. Establish Baseline: Test MVP with real cohort; measure conversion & retention.
  2. Tune Engine: Single-variable experiments moving baseline toward target.
  3. Pivot or Persevere: If tuning hits diminishing returns without reaching viability -> PIVOT.

The 10 Structural Pivot Types

Zoom-in, Zoom-out, Customer Segment, Customer Need, Platform, Business Architecture, Value Capture, Engine of Growth, Channel, Technology.


Decision Trees

"What should our MVP be?"

What do you need to LEARN?
|-- "Do customers want this at all?"
|   +-- Smoke test (landing page + traffic) or Video MVP
|-- "Will customers pay for this?"
|   +-- Concierge or Wizard of Oz (deliver manually, charge real money)
+-- "Which features matter?"
    +-- Single-feature MVP + split testing (N >= 30)

"Should we pivot?"

Are experiments moving metrics toward the ideal?
|-- YES, meaningfully --> Persevere. Keep tuning.
|-- YES, but very slowly --> Investigate. Are you out of easy optimizations?
|   |-- YES --> Consider pivot
|   +-- NO  --> Keep tuning, but set a deadline
+-- NO --> Have you exhausted experiment ideas for current strategy?
          |-- YES --> PIVOT. Convene pivot meeting; select structural pivot.
          +-- NO  --> Run more experiments, but set a time box.

Supporting Files

  • frameworks.md - Full academic theory: BML cycle deep-dive, engines math, SMED, Five Whys, Sandboxes.
  • cases.md - 14 real-world cases: IMVU, Zappos, Dropbox, Groupon, Grockit, Votizen, Wealthfront, Intuit, etc.
  • examples.md - Complete printable worksheets, templates, and end-to-end MealSync case walkthrough.
  • integration.md - Hand-offs: Mom Test, Four Steps, Crossing the Chasm, $100M Offers, SPIN Selling.

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.