first-contact
Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Red-team onboarding and first use to find confusion, broken expectations, and abandonment.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ZwaarContrast/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- ZwaarContrast/skills★ 1same 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 repository27 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-skills-agentsAGENTS.md
- agent-skills-claudeCLAUDE.md
- agent-log-forensicsSkill
- changelog-writerSkill
- chezmoi-driftSkill
- contacts-unifySkill
- decision-logSkill
- dependency-pinningSkill
- django-smoke-alarmSkill
- empathy-auditSkill
- handle-prSkill
- launch-sequenceSkill
- parallel-isolated-app-testingSkill
- post-mortemSkill
- pre-mortemSkill
- profile-meSkill
- ralph-loopSkill
- release-operatorSkill
- remote-host-verifierSkill
- research-personSkill
- scope-hammerSkill
- second-opinionsSkill
- status-copy-trust-auditSkill
- support-stormSkill
- trust-auditSkill
- visual-qa-loopSkill
- wide-open-brainstormSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 1 is 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.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 15
Use this skill to attack the first 5-15 minutes of the product experience.
- Distinctive: line 23
never reaches the promised “aha” moment
- Distinctive: line 27
Use this skill when reviewing:
- Distinctive: line 44
Prefer observation over imagination: if the product can be installed or run here, walk the real path (fresh state, default settings) and …
- Distinctive: line 56
If there are multiple likely paths, audit the default path first.
- Very specific: line 70
Read references/heuristics.md (in this skill's directory) for severity-upgrade rules and common killers.
≈ “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
First-Run Red Team
Use this skill to attack the first 5-15 minutes of the product experience.
A first-run red team is about finding where a new user:
- gets confused
- hesitates
- grants a permission without understanding it
- denies a permission and never recovers
- thinks the app is broken
- never reaches the promised “aha” moment
When to Use
Use this skill when reviewing:
- install flow
- onboarding
- permission requests
- setup checklists
- first successful action
- first failure recovery
- menu bar or background apps where state is easy to miss
Core Principle
The first-run experience fails when the product asks the user to do too much, trust too much, or infer too much before value is obvious.
<process>Step 1: Map the first-run path
Prefer observation over imagination: if the product can be installed or run here, walk the real path (fresh state, default settings) and note what you saw. Where you can only infer from code or docs, label the finding inferred, not observed.
Build a minute-by-minute path from:
- discovery / install
- launch
- first window or menu
- setup tasks
- permission prompts
- first success moment
- first screenshot / first sync / first alert / first rename / first whatever the product does
- first failure state and recovery
If there are multiple likely paths, audit the default path first.
Step 2: Simulate multiple user mindsets
At minimum, simulate these personas:
- In a hurry — wants value in under 2 minutes
- Skeptical — suspicious of permissions, billing, AI, or privacy
- Normal but inattentive — will miss subtle text and icon changes
- Slightly unlucky — hits one bad edge case early
For each persona, walk the path step by step.
Step 3: Find first-run failure points
Read references/heuristics.md (in this skill's directory) for severity-upgrade rules and common killers.
Look for:
- unexplained permissions
- unclear prerequisites
- too many decisions too early
- jargon, hidden defaults, or settings that matter more than they look
- moments where the app appears idle or dead
- weak proof that setup succeeded
- confusing recovery after a denial, skip, or transient failure
- ways an early failure poisons the user’s mental model permanently
Step 4: Score the friction
For each failure point, include:
- Moment
- What the user is trying to do
- What blocks or confuses them
- Likely user interpretation
- Abandonment risk — low/medium/high
- Recovery quality — good/weak/bad
- Fastest fix — product / copy / diagnostics / state visibility / defaults
Step 5: Present the walkthrough
Use this format:
# First-Run Red Team: [Product / Feature]
## Executive Read
- First-run step most likely to lose the user:
- Permission moment most likely to fail:
- Moment where the app most likely looks dead:
- Fastest improvement to lift activation:
## First-Run Timeline
1. [step]
2. [step]
3. [step]
## Failure Points
### 1. [Title]
**Moment:**
**User goal:**
**What goes wrong:**
**Likely interpretation:**
**Abandonment risk:**
**Recovery quality:**
**Fastest fix:**
## Persona Notes
### In a hurry
- ...
### Skeptical
- ...
### Normal but inattentive
- ...
### Slightly unlucky
- ...
## Activation Killers
- [issue]
- [issue]
- [issue]
## Highest-Leverage First-Run Fixes
1. [ ]
2. [ ]
3. [ ]Success Criteria
The red team is complete when it identifies:
- where the user is most likely to bail
- where the app most likely looks broken or suspicious
- where a denied permission or skipped step becomes unrecoverable
- the smallest changes that would materially improve activation
</process>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.

