agentleFS
chanktbchanktb/claude-google-ads/skills/experiments/SKILL.md

google-ads-experiments

Skill11 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Designs disciplined A/B tests for Google Ads — campaign-level splits (bidding, brand exclusion, new- customer mode, split structure) and asset-group/ad-group-level splits — changing one variable at a time with a feasibility check, clear success criteria, and minimum runtime. Prevents "testing by spawning random campaigns". Reads account-context.yaml. Use when the user says "experiment", "A/B test", "split test", "which works better", "test budget/bidding/audience".

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    If each arm won't accumulate enough conversions to detect a meaningful difference, say so and either: extend the runtime, increase budget, …

    line 28
  2. Distinctive:

    Prefer native Google Ads Experiments / campaign drafts where the campaign type supports them.

    line 42
  3. Distinctive:

    When to call it: enough volume + runtime elapsed.

    line 46

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Google Ads — Experiments

Turn a "let's test X" into a clean experiment: one variable, enough volume to learn something, a defined readout. This is how the split menus in the builders get validated — not by guessing.

Model dispatch (run cheap, decide expensive) — see ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/model-tier-dispatch.md

  • Scout (haiku) — STEP 2 significance.py run.
  • Routine (sonnet) — pulling conversions-per-arm estimates / recent volume for the feasibility check. Dispatch as general-purpose; return raw numbers.
  • Judge (main session) — STEP 1 variable choice, STEP 3 design + decision rule, STEP 4 platform mapping, STEP 5 readout call (against the pre-stated rule, not early noise). The power math is mechanical; designing a test that can conclude is judgment.

STEP 1 — Pick ONE variable

From the catalog (campaign-level: bidding strategy, tROAS level, brand-exclusion on/off, new-customer mode, split structure A vs B from ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/pmax-split-strategies.md; ad-group/asset-group-level: copy theme, audience signal, landing page). Change exactly one — never bundle variables (you won't know what moved).

STEP 2 — Feasibility check (don't run a test that can't conclude)

Using ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/references/forecasting-and-benchmarks.md, estimate conversions per arm over the planned runtime. If each arm won't accumulate enough conversions to detect a meaningful difference, say so and either: extend the runtime, increase budget, pick a higher-volume variable, or skip the test. A test too small to reach significance is worse than no test — it invites false conclusions. Runnable check: python ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/experiments/scripts/significance.py --conv-per-arm N [--mde 0.15] → smallest detectable lift + whether the run is powered for your target effect.

STEP 3 — Design

  • Control vs variant, 50/50 split, one variable.
  • Primary success metric (e.g. ROAS, CPA, conversions) + guardrail metrics (don't win on CPA while tanking volume).
  • Minimum runtime (cover learning + at least 2-4 weeks; avoid mid-experiment changes).
  • Pre-state the decision rule: what result ships the variant, what reverts it.

STEP 4 — Map to the platform

Prefer native Google Ads Experiments / campaign drafts where the campaign type supports them; otherwise describe the manual A/B setup. Note PMax's experiment support and limits for the chosen variable.

STEP 5 — Readout criteria

When to call it: enough volume + runtime elapsed. Judge against the pre-stated rule and significance, not a gut read of early noise. Output: winner, confidence, and the next action (ship / revert / iterate). Respect the change-event cooldown when applying the result via pusher.

Guardrails

  • One variable at a time. No mid-flight changes. No calling a winner before the runtime/volume threshold.
  • Honor margin_tiers when the metric is ROAS (compare within a tier, not across).

To build / refine later

  • Significance calculator (scripts/significance.py). Done.

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.