agentleFS
UsermuseUsermuse/em-plugin/skills/customer-journey-map/SKILL.md

customer-journey-map

Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Map the end-to-end customer journey — awareness through advocacy — with the real pain point, emotion, and a verbatim customer quote at each stage, plus prioritized fixes. Use when the user says 'map the customer journey', 'map the user journey', 'where do users drop off', 'improve onboarding', 'what does the customer experience look like', or wants a journey/experience map grounded in real feedback. Trigger terms: customer journey, journey map, user journey, drop-off, onboarding friction, moments of truth, experience map. Not for internal process/workflow diagrams with no customer involved.

19 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use brainstorm-experiments-existing, brainstorm-ideas-new and 3 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.
  • skytiger6724Skill

    brainstorm-experiments-existing

    Design experiments to test assumptions for an existing product — prototypes, A/B tests, spikes, and other low-effort validation methods. Use when validating assumptions, testing feature ideas cheaply, or planning product experiments.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • skytiger6724Skill

    brainstorm-ideas-new

    Brainstorm feature ideas for a new product in initial discovery from PM, Designer, and Engineer perspectives. Use when starting product discovery for a new product, exploring features for a startup idea, or doing initial ideation.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • 45ckSkill

    porters-five-forces

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • +2 more from skytiger6724

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 18 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Required — one parallel batch of searches: Verify the product (Rule 1), then fire in a single parallel batch:

    line 29
  2. Very specific:

    Name the traveler: Use a specific persona with a JTBD, not a generic user — reuse one from /evermuse:user-personas if it exists in the …

    line 41
  3. Distinctive:

    If a stage has no evidence in the corpus, say so explicitly ("no feedback captured for Advocacy") rather than inventing a pain — that gap …

    line 62

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 18 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

Customer Journey Map (evidence at every stage)

Map the journey from first awareness to advocacy — and make each stage carry a real customer's words about the friction there. A journey map with plausible-but-invented pains is just a diagram; this one shows, stage by stage, where real users actually struggle and what they said about it.

Step 0 — Relevance & availability

Confirm this is a customer-experience question and Evermuse is connected (see using-evermuse Step 0). If disconnected, produce the framework labeled ⚠ ungrounded and tell the user to authorize the MCP.

Evermuse Grounding (required)

Follow ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/using-evermuse/SKILL.md.

Required — one parallel batch of searches. Verify the product (Rule 1), then fire in a single parallel batch:

  • 3–4 evidence searches, each worded from a different angle (limit up to 50). Evidence comes back rich and varied — expect large, useful result sets.
  • one guidance search and one context search (limit up to 50). These are usually sparse or empty; run them anyway and note when they're thin.

Read each response's digest — it reports how many more results exist. Use judgment on whether a query is worth pulling deeper (raise limit toward the 100 max and/or page with next_offset to avoid repeats), weighing payload size, remaining context, task complexity, and the value of the data. For deep pulls, consider spawning sub-agents — instruct them to return every citation with the same metadata the tools return (url, who_said_it, meeting_name, created_at) so you can still cite.

Optional — considered use. Once grounded, reach for the other tools only when they add value: a quote-angled search for verbatim voice, read_source for a single deep dive, inline citations (references/citations.md), and add_source to save the deliverable. Sources, citations, and saving are optional — not required.

Instructions

Build the journey map for $ARGUMENTS.

  1. Name the traveler. Use a specific persona with a JTBD, not a generic user — reuse one from /evermuse:user-personas if it exists in the session.
  2. Map the stages (adapt to the product): Awareness → Consideration → Acquisition → Onboarding → Engagement → Retention → Advocacy.
  3. For each stage, document — grounding each pain in the notes/quotes you pulled, not in intuition:
    • Touchpoints — where they interact (site, email, in-app, support).
    • User actions — what they do here.
    • Thoughts & questions — what's on their mind.
    • Emotion — how they feel (emoji or –2…+2 scale), inferred from the sentiment of real feedback where available.
    • Pain point — the real friction, badged with a quote.
    • Opportunity — how to fix it.
  4. Mark the critical moments: the aha moment (first real value), moments of truth (commit/abandon), and churn triggers — anchor each to evidence.

The map

| Stage | Touchpoint | Action | Emotion | Pain (evidence) | Opportunity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Onboarding | in-app setup | connects data source | 😣 –1 | "I gave up wiring it in on day one" — [Name], [Mtg], [Date] [`1`](URL) | guided setup wizard |

Under the table, put a stage-by-stage quote reel — the sharpest verbatim line per painful stage — then prioritized improvements (highest impact on conversion/retention first; quick wins vs. deeper bets). Every quote carries its inline badge.

If a stage has no evidence in the corpus, say so explicitly ("no feedback captured for Advocacy") rather than inventing a pain — that gap is itself a finding. For a visual map, suggest recreating this in FigJam/Miro.


Further reading

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.