funnel-analysis
Skill2 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use before beginning any conversion rate optimisation effort. Requires the leak to be identified and root-caused before any solution is proposed. Blocks "let's improve our conversion rate" without knowing which step breaks.
9 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- shisuidata/ss-data-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- astDeniss/business-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- sp1e/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 12, 2026
- Zafer-Liu/Data-Analysis-Agenttheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- chaakresh/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 7, 2026
- liangdabiao/claudesdk-data-chattheir own version, first seen May 24, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use ab-test-analysis and market-research.
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.
About-IntelligenceSkillab-test-analysis
Analyze A/B test results with statistical significance, sample size validation, confidence intervals, and ship/extend/stop recommendations.
Also in 3 projects that use this
birne-skSkillmarket-research
Professional market research and competitive analysis using McKinsey/BCG/Bain consulting methodologies. Use when analyzing markets, competitive landscapes, customer insights, or strategic positioning. Generates hypothesis-driven research with PPTX presentation deliverables.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions9 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 9
- Zafer-Liu/Data-Analysis-Agent★ 2.6ksame name
- liangdabiao/claude-data-analysis-ultra-main★ 282same name
- astDeniss/business-skills★ 8same name
- shisuidata/ss-data-skills★ 8same name
- liangdabiao/claudesdk-data-chat★ 4same name
- nandanosql/all_in_one_pm_skills★ 1same name
- sp1e/claude-skills★ 1same name
- chaakresh/claude-skills★ 0same name
- shyamw-cloud/Claude-skill★ 0same 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 repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- ai-messaging-reviewSkill
- campaign-brief-generatorSkill
- channel-selection-auditSkill
- copy-quality-gateSkill
- experiment-designSkill
- growth-metrics-designSkill
- growth-strategy-designSkill
- launch-plan-designSkill
- offer-quality-gateSkill
- positioning-auditSkill
- pricing-page-reviewSkill
- retention-designSkill
- social-proof-reviewSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
7
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
- Distinctive: line 31
Do not propose solutions before completing all four.
- Distinctive: line 45
Use the product's actual steps — not a generic template.
- Distinctive: line 71
Exit surveys: ask users who did not complete the step.
- Distinctive: line 76
Document the root cause explicitly.
- Distinctive: line 88
After the primary leak is diagnosed and a hypothesis is formed, identify the next two highest-impact leaks.
- Distinctive: line 106
Use session recordings, exit surveys, heatmaps, error logs, or segmentation.
- Distinctive: line 128
When funnel-analysis is satisfied, state it like this:
“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.
Files
Funnel Analysis
The Law
OPTIMISING A FUNNEL BEFORE DIAGNOSING IT OPTIMISES THE WRONG STEP.
"Let's improve the conversion rate" without identifying which step leaks most is guessing — you can improve every step but the broken one and the funnel does not move.
Leak identified + root-caused + hypothesis formed IS a funnel analysis.When to Use
Trigger before:
- Any CRO (conversion rate optimisation) effort
- Proposing any experiment targeting funnel improvement
- Allocating engineering or design time to "improve" any multi-step flow
- Presenting funnel performance to stakeholders
When NOT to Use
- Single-step actions with no funnel (e.g., a standalone API call — no steps to diagnose)
- Features in pre-launch without traffic data to analyse
The Four Diagnostic Steps
Do not propose solutions before completing all four.
Step 1 — Map the Funnel
List every step between the user's entry point and the conversion goal.
Step 1: [Action] — e.g., "User arrives on landing page"
Step 2: [Action] — e.g., "User clicks CTA"
Step 3: [Action] — e.g., "User completes signup form"
Step 4: [Action] — e.g., "User activates (completes first key action)"
Goal: [Conversion] — e.g., "User converts to paid"Use the product's actual steps — not a generic template. Every step must be measurable.
Step 2 — Quantify Each Step
For each step, collect:
- Volume: how many users enter this step per period
- Exit rate: percentage who leave without completing this step
- Time in step: median and p95 time spent before exit
| Step | Entered | Completed | Exit rate | Median time |
|------|---------|-----------|-----------|-------------|
| 1 | 10,000 | 8,100 | 19% | 2s |
| 2 | 8,100 | 2,430 | 70% | 45s |
| 3 | 2,430 | 2,070 | 15% | 3min |
| 4 | 2,070 | 830 | 60% | 12h |The step with the highest exit rate AND the highest volume of exits (exits = entered × exit rate) is the primary leak. Both dimensions matter — a 70% exit rate on 100 users is smaller than a 20% exit rate on 10,000.
Step 3 — Root-Cause the Primary Leak
Finding the leak step is not the analysis. Understanding why users leave is.
Root cause methods:
- Session recordings: watch users exit; what were they doing at the moment they left?
- Exit surveys: ask users who did not complete the step; "What stopped you?"
- Heatmaps: where do users click, scroll, and hover before exit?
- Error logs: are exits correlated with errors, slow load times, or validation failures?
- Segmentation: does the exit rate differ by device, traffic source, user segment, or A/B variant?
Document the root cause explicitly. "Users drop off at step 2" is not a root cause. "Users arrive at step 2, attempt to complete the form on mobile, encounter a keyboard overlap that hides the submit button, and exit within 8 seconds" is a root cause.
Step 4 — Form a Testable Hypothesis
One hypothesis per root cause, in the form:
If we [specific change], then the [step N] exit rate will decrease by [magnitude], because [mechanism connecting change to root cause].
This hypothesis goes directly into experiment-design before any solution is built.
Secondary Leaks
After the primary leak is diagnosed and a hypothesis is formed, identify the next two highest-impact leaks. Document them but do not begin work on them until the primary leak hypothesis is tested. Fixing two leaks simultaneously produces unattributable results.
The Process
Step 1 — Define the Funnel Boundary
Name the entry event and the conversion goal. Everything in between is a step.
Step 2 — Pull the Step Data
Query volume, exit rate, and time-in-step for each step. Use actual data — not estimates.
Step 3 — Calculate the Primary Leak
Volume × exit rate = exits. Rank steps by exits. The top-ranked step is the primary leak.
Step 4 — Root-Cause Using at Least Two Methods
Use session recordings, exit surveys, heatmaps, error logs, or segmentation. Two independent methods reduce the risk of a single-method false root cause.
Step 5 — Write the Hypothesis
One sentence in the required form.
Step 6 — Store the Analysis
Store at growth/funnel-analysis/<funnel>-<date>.md with the step data table, root cause documentation, and hypothesis.
Rationalization Red Flags
These thoughts mean the analysis was not done — stop:
- "Let's improve the conversion rate" — conversion rate of what? at which step? measured from where to where? — "improve conversion rate" is a goal, not a diagnosis
- "The checkout page is the problem" — maybe; the checkout page exit rate relative to other steps determines whether it's the primary leak; intuition about which step is the problem is wrong roughly half the time
- "We should run an experiment on the landing page" — before an experiment: which step is the primary leak, what is the root cause, and what does the hypothesis predict? a landing page experiment without a root-cause is a guess
- "The data says the drop-off is at step 3" — this is the leak identified but not root-caused; step 3 drop-off is a where, not a why; the experiment target is the why
- "We've tried improving step 2 before" — was the root cause of step 2 identified before the improvement was designed? if not, the previous effort was also a guess
Completion Statement Format
When funnel-analysis is satisfied, state it like this:
Funnel analysis complete.
File: growth/funnel-analysis/<funnel>-<date>.md ✓
Funnel: [entry event] → [conversion goal], <N steps>
Data period: [date range], [data source]
Step data:
| Step | Entered | Exit rate | Exits (vol × rate) |
| [steps with real numbers] |
Primary leak: Step <N> — <X> exits/period (<Y>% exit rate) ✓
Root cause: [specific description — from session recordings + exit survey] ✓
Methods used: [session recordings / exit survey / heatmap / error logs / segmentation]
Hypothesis: If [specific change], then Step N exit rate decreases by [X%] because [mechanism] ✓
Next step: experiment-design ✓
Secondary leaks identified: Step <A> and Step <B> — queued after primary hypothesis test ✓A root cause described as "users drop off" is not a root cause. The root cause names the specific friction, error, or mismatch the user encountered.
Why This Matters
Funnel optimisation without diagnosis is a succession of guesses, each of which produces a result that may be noise. Teams that optimise without diagnosing spend months running experiments on steps that are not the primary leak, accumulate a library of inconclusive results, and conclude that "the funnel is hard to improve." The funnel is hard to improve when the primary leak is not identified. When it is, improvement is often a single change.
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.

