user-journey-tracking
Skill116 starsChanged 11 months agoMITView on GitHub
Track user journeys with intent context and friction signals. Use when instrumenting onboarding, checkout, or any multi-step flow where you need to understand WHY users fail.
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- crash-instrumentationSkill
- instrumentation-planningSkill
- interaction-latencySkill
- navigation-latencySkill
- network-tracingSkill
- session-replaySkill
- symbolication-setupSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
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 20
Every journey event should help answer: "Why did users fail to complete their intended task?"
- Distinctive: line 44
Not just success/failure:
- Distinctive: line 72
Before adding journey instrumentation:
- Distinctive: line 78
If no to all three → probably don't need it.
≈ “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.
Files
User Journey Tracking
Track not just WHAT users do, but WHETHER they accomplished their goal.
Core Principle
Every journey event should help answer: "Why did users fail to complete their intended task?"
Key Context to Attach
| Field | Example | Purpose |
job_name | "checkout" | User's intended task |
job_step | "payment" | Current step in journey |
job_progress | "3/4" | How far they got |
outcome | "success" / "friction" / "abandon" | Did they succeed? |
Friction Signals to Track
Detect user struggle before they contact support:
| Signal | Detection |
| Rage taps | 3+ taps same element in 1s |
| Retry exhaustion | 3+ retries of same action |
| Quick abandonment | Exit within 5s of error |
| Navigation loops | 3+ back navigations without progress |
Outcome Quality
Not just success/failure:
- Completed smoothly — no friction
- Completed with friction — retries, errors, slow
- Abandoned after friction — struggled, then quit
- Abandoned immediately — no engagement
"Completed with friction" is often the most actionable signal.
When to Use This Skill
- Onboarding flows
- Checkout/payment funnels
- Signup/registration
- Any multi-step process
- Feature adoption tracking
Implementation References
| Topic | Reference |
| Full methodology | references/user-focused-observability.md |
| Job-based patterns | references/jtbd.md |
| Friction detection code | references/user-journeys.md |
| Journey correlation | references/user-journeys.md |
Decision Tree
Before adding journey instrumentation:
- Does this help identify what the user was trying to do? → Add intent context
- Does this help determine if they succeeded? → Track outcomes
- Does this help explain why they failed? → Add friction signals
If no to all three → probably don't need it.
Related Skills
- See
skills/instrumentation-planningfor prioritization framework - Combine with
skills/interaction-latencyfor friction detection on key actions - Combine with
skills/navigation-latencyfor screen transition context
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.