performance-optimizer
Skill3 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Post-mortems a piece of content and produces the next iteration, not just an explanation. It isolates the weakest link, proposes single-variable A/B tests, and applies a double-down rule when something wins. Use when someone asks "why did this flop", "why did this win", "help me optimize/improve my content", "set up an A/B test", or wants a post-mortem. Works with any capable model.
17 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- oivanfelipe/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Domenico-Tenace-Open-Labs/web-dev-agenttheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- mrhinkle/VibeCoding-a-Websitetheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- saksham-techlabs/ai-builder-skills-packtheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- neeraj181-dot/ClaudeSkillstheir own version, first seen Aug 25, 2026
- TheHiddenDeveloper/jarvis-skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 19, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use observability-engineer, security-auditor and 5 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.
xfstudioSkillobservability-engineer
Build production-ready monitoring, logging, and tracing systems.
Also in 3 projects that use this
nahisahoSkillsecurity-auditor
security-auditor skill
Also in 5 projects that use this
lodetomasiSkilldatabase-optimizer
Database performance optimization: N+1 detection, query analysis, indexing, and ORM tuning
Also in 3 projects that use this
AutumnsGroveSkillapi-designer
Design and document RESTful and GraphQL APIs with OpenAPI/Swagger specifications, authentication patterns, versioning strategies, and best practices. Use for: (1) Creating API specifications, (2) Designing REST endpoints, (3) GraphQL schema design, (4) API authentication and authorization, (5) API versioning strategies, (6) Documentation generation
Also in 3 projects that use this
GoogleSkillcode-reviewer
Also in 5 projects that use this
xenitV1Skillclean-code
Pragmatic coding standards - concise, direct, no over-engineering, no unnecessary comments
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions17 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 17
- nahisaho/MUSUBI★ 74same name
- glincker/claude-code-marketplace★ 37same name
- mrhinkle/VibeCoding-a-Website★ 17same name
- nihao555-hub/claude-code-agent-skills★ 4same name
- Domenico-Tenace-Open-Labs/web-dev-agent★ 3same name
- CODE-SAURABH/OpenSkills★ 2same name
- mehdiozdemir/awesome-agent-skills★ 2same name
- ronrefael/sonde★ 2same name
- rudrathegreat/Astronomy-AI-Toolkit★ 2same name
- lschGSL/claude_code_template★ 1same name
7 more not listed
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 repository19 other files it gives its agents.
- analytics-interpreterSkill
- audience-bullseyeSkill
- brand-voice-keeperSkill
- breakout-detectorSkill
- campaign-builderSkill
- channel-competitor-analysisSkill
- content-strategy-engineSkill
- cross-platform-adapterSkill
- engagement-boosterSkill
- growth-orchestratorSkill
- hook-machineSkill
- offer-cta-architectSkill
- onboarding-brand-briefSkill
- profile-optimizerSkill
- repurpose-masterSkill
- trend-jackerSkill
- viral-script-generatorSkill
- visual-idea-generatorSkill
- youtube-title-labSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 13 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
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 21
Write the hypothesis as: "If I change [X], then [metric] improves, because [reason]." Keep everything else identical.
- Distinctive: line 22
Run 3-5 posts per variant before judging — a single post is noise.
- Distinctive: line 63
Never conclude from a single post.
- Distinctive: line 64
When something wins, make 3 more immediately — ride the pattern while the algorithm favors it.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 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.
Files
Performance Optimizer
A post that flopped is a free experiment — but only if you extract one lesson and ship the next test. Optimization is not "make it better everywhere"; it is finding the single weakest link, changing ONE variable, and letting the numbers vote. Content has four links in series — Hook, Body/Retention, CTA/Conversion, Distribution — and the chain breaks at its weakest point. Fixing anything other than the weakest link is motion without progress. Winners are not luck to admire; they are formats to industrialize. Every result routes to one of three verbs: KILL, ITERATE, or SCALE.
1. Post-mortem — isolate the weakest link
- Pull the funnel: hook rate, retention/avg watch, saves+shares per view, follows-per-view, reach.
- Find the FIRST metric below the account's median — that is the weakest link. Attribute the outcome to it, not to a vibe.
- Weak hook rate -> packaging problem (first frame, first line, title, thumbnail). Good hook + retention cliff -> body problem (pacing, payoff, structure). Good retention + low saves/follows -> CTA/value problem. Everything fine + low reach -> timing, niche-fit, or an unlucky test batch (re-test before concluding).
- State ONE root cause in a sentence. If you can't, you're guessing — get more data.
2. Design single-variable A/B tests
- Change exactly ONE variable per test so the result is attributable. Multi-variable "improvements" teach nothing.
- Highest-leverage variables in order: hook line, first frame/thumbnail, first 3 seconds, format/structure, topic angle, CTA, length, posting time.
- Write the hypothesis as: "If I change [X], then [metric] improves, because [reason]." Keep everything else identical.
- Run 3-5 posts per variant before judging — a single post is noise; the algorithm's test audience varies wildly.
- Judge on the diagnostic RATE tied to the change (hook test -> hook rate), not on total views.
3. Double-down, and decide KILL / ITERATE / SCALE
- Double-down rule: when a post beats your median by ~2-3x, immediately make 3 more in the same format/angle/hook pattern while it's hot. Winners cluster.
- KILL: below median on hook AND value after 3+ attempts — the concept doesn't land. Stop; free the slots.
- ITERATE: mixed signals (strong hook, weak body, or vice versa) — keep the strong link, run one test on the weak link.
- SCALE: clear winner — replicate the pattern, vary only surface topics, and push volume. Turn the one-off into a series/template.
- Iteration loop: Ship -> read the one weakest link -> change one variable -> re-ship -> compare to median -> route to Kill/Iterate/Scale. Repeat weekly.
Output template
POST-MORTEM
- Result vs median: [win / flop / average] ([metric], [n] vs [median])
- Funnel read: hook [n]% | retention [n]% | saves+shares [n]% | follows/view [n]
- Weakest link: [hook / body / CTA / distribution]
- Root cause (one sentence): [...]
RANKED FIXES (highest leverage first)
1. [fix] — targets [metric]
2. [fix]
3. [fix]
NEXT 3 EXPERIMENTS (one variable each)
1. Change [X] -> hypothesis: [metric] improves because [reason]
2. Change [Y] -> ...
3. Change [Z] -> ...
DECISION: KILL / ITERATE / SCALE — [why]Platform variants
- Short video: iterate hooks and first-frames fastest; retention curve is the truth serum.
- YouTube long-form: A/B thumbnail+title first (CTR), then intro (30s retention); tests take days, not hours.
- Carousels/LinkedIn: test slide 1 / opening line and the save-worthy payoff; saves and dwell decide.
- X: test the first line and the format (hook+list vs story); reposts and profile clicks judge it.
Rules
- Isolate ONE weakest link before proposing any fix — no shotgun changes.
- One variable per test, always — attributable or worthless.
- Never conclude from a single post; require 3-5 before you kill or scale.
- When something wins, make 3 more immediately — ride the pattern while the algorithm favors it.
- Judge each test on the rate it targets, not on vanity totals.
- Kill decisively. Dead concepts steal the volume your winners need.
- Compare to the account's own median, never to an absolute or to someone else's numbers.
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.

