agentleFS
checkout-pagecheckout-page/ecommerce-skills/skills/store-audit/SKILL.md

store-audit

Skill5 starsChanged 36 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when reviewing an online store as a whole — homepage, category pages, channel mix, or trust — e.g. "review my store", "audit my homepage", "Instagram or Google Ads?", "should we say we're a small team", "how should we label recommendations", "carousel or grid", "how do we look more trustworthy", "should we sell on Amazon too". For one product page, use product-page; for cart or checkout, use checkout-ux.

2 other projects use 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:

    Cost transparency: If margin ≤ ~55%, show a per-product cost breakdown (materials, labor, shipping, packaging, development).

    line 41
  2. Distinctive:

    Sustainability: If real, state it on product and packaging: 6.4% higher revenue across 10 million grocery sales, and people enjoy the …

    line 44
  3. Distinctive:

    Marketplaces: If unknown, list on a major marketplace: 1 in 71 marketplace sales creates a direct customer.

    line 45

≈ “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

Store audit

Make the site-wide calls that depend on what you sell and what kind of company you are. Most follow from one classification, so classify first.

When to use

  • Where marketing budget goes (social, search, comparison sites, marketplaces)
  • Homepage/category layout, carousels, recommendation labels, visual style
  • Which trust signals to show
  • Whether to list on a marketplace

When not to use

  • A single product page → product-page
  • A cart, checkout, or payment form → checkout-ux
  • Shipping, returns, loyalty, retargeting → post-purchase
  • Prices or discounts → pricing / discounts

Inputs

Collect, or state your assumption:

  • The product and who buys it (for the classification)
  • Company size and whether the product is high-tech
  • Current channel mix, homepage layout, recommendation label
  • Gross margin; any verifiable sustainability practice; marketplace presence

Classify the product first. Hedonic = bought for enjoyment, pleasure, or the experience (chocolate, fashion, decor, travel, spa, perfume). Utilitarian = bought to do a job, judged on function and value (detergent, appliances, insect repellent, tools, accounting software). If it's mixed, decide by what the buyer is optimizing for at the moment of purchase.

Procedure

  1. Channels by product type. Hedonic → social media and your own product pages; the journey is impulsive and starts on social. Utilitarian → search ads, comparison sites, third-party reviews, deal sites; the buyer compares for value.
  2. Recommendation labels. Utilitarian → algorithm-based label ("Recommended based on your browsing"). Hedonic → human label ("Our expert's pick"). Keep the module; change the label.
  3. Layout direction. Horizontal (carousel) makes people weigh quality and the primary feature — 26% more chose the pricier, higher-quality laptop. Vertical (scroll) makes them price-sensitive. Horizontal where quality should win, vertical where you compete on price.
  4. Visual style. Structured (straight lines, symmetry, geometry) reads reliable; unstructured (rounded, incomplete, unpredictable) reads fun. Match the brand: matched perfume ads got 39% more clicks. †
  5. Cost transparency. If margin ≤ ~55%, show a per-product cost breakdown (materials, labor, shipping, packaging, development); group beyond ~8 categories. Sales were 22% higher for a $115 wallet with one.
  6. Company size. Small, low-tech → say so prominently; buyers infer motivated staff and better quality. Small, high-tech → show R&D effort. Large, low-tech → show employee passion.
  7. Warranty. Offer one far longer than the category norm (10-year hoodie): 34.8% more bought. Best for buyers who know the category but not your brand. For consumables, the equivalent is an unusually strong effectiveness or satisfaction guarantee (untested, same mechanism).
  8. Sustainability. If real, state it on product and packaging: 6.4% higher revenue across 10 million grocery sales, and people enjoy the product more when they know. Small businesses gain most. †
  9. Marketplaces. If unknown, list on a major marketplace: 1 in 71 marketplace sales creates a direct customer; acquisition cost averages 24% of revenue vs 30–100% direct. Give a reason to switch, within marketplace rules.

Output

Table: priority, area, recommendation, rule + number. Then what to leave alone, and why.

Common mistakes

  • Removing an "algorithm" label as fake — for utilitarian products it outperforms; for hedonic, relabel as human.
  • Calling carousels weak in general — direction sets whether quality or price wins.
  • Choosing search over social on intent alone — the rule is product type; hedonic starts on social.
  • Hiding that you're small — for low-tech products it raises perceived quality.
  • Hiding costs to protect margin — the effect holds to 55%.

Quick reference

SituationDo
HedonicSocial + product pages; human-labeled recs
UtilitarianSearch, comparison, review, deal sites; algorithm-labeled recs
Quality should win / price should winHorizontal / vertical layout
Margin ≤ 55%Cost breakdown, ≤ 8 categories
Small, low-tech / small, high-techSay you're small / show R&D
Unknown brandExtraordinary warranty; marketplace listing

† No primary citation on file for this rule — a practitioner tip, not a measured finding.

Evidence and effect sizes: see reference.md.

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.