agentleFS
moses607moses607/socialforge/skills/performance-optimizer/SKILL.md

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

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.
  • xfstudioSkill

    observability-engineer

    Build production-ready monitoring, logging, and tracing systems.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • nahisahoSkill

    security-auditor

    security-auditor skill

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • lodetomasiSkill

    database-optimizer

    Database performance optimization: N+1 detection, query analysis, indexing, and ORM tuning

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AutumnsGroveSkill

    api-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

  • GoogleSkill

    code-reviewer

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • xenitV1Skill

    clean-code

    Pragmatic coding standards - concise, direct, no over-engineering, no unnecessary comments

    Also in 3 projects that use this

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
  1. Distinctive:

    Write the hypothesis as: "If I change [X], then [metric] improves, because [reason]." Keep everything else identical.

    line 21
  2. Distinctive:

    Run 3-5 posts per variant before judging — a single post is noise.

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    Never conclude from a single post.

    line 63
  4. Distinctive:

    When something wins, make 3 more immediately — ride the pattern while the algorithm favors it.

    line 64

“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.

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

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

  1. Pull the funnel: hook rate, retention/avg watch, saves+shares per view, follows-per-view, reach.
  2. Find the FIRST metric below the account's median — that is the weakest link. Attribute the outcome to it, not to a vibe.
  3. 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).
  4. State ONE root cause in a sentence. If you can't, you're guessing — get more data.

2. Design single-variable A/B tests

  1. Change exactly ONE variable per test so the result is attributable. Multi-variable "improvements" teach nothing.
  2. Highest-leverage variables in order: hook line, first frame/thumbnail, first 3 seconds, format/structure, topic angle, CTA, length, posting time.
  3. Write the hypothesis as: "If I change [X], then [metric] improves, because [reason]." Keep everything else identical.
  4. Run 3-5 posts per variant before judging — a single post is noise; the algorithm's test audience varies wildly.
  5. 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

  1. 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.
  2. KILL: below median on hook AND value after 3+ attempts — the concept doesn't land. Stop; free the slots.
  3. ITERATE: mixed signals (strong hook, weak body, or vice versa) — keep the strong link, run one test on the weak link.
  4. SCALE: clear winner — replicate the pattern, vary only surface topics, and push volume. Turn the one-off into a series/template.
  5. 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.

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.