agentleFS
neonwattyneonwatty/qa-skills/skills/trust-builder/SKILL.md

trust-builder

Skill34 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Analyzes web apps for free-value trust-building opportunities — features, tools, and offerings that demonstrate genuine utility before asking for commitment. Use this when the user says "trust builder", "trust audit", "find free offerings", "free value analysis", "trust building opportunities", or "how can I build trust with users". Explores the codebase and live app, interviews the user about audience and goals, then generates a prioritized report with full mini-specs for the top trust-building features.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

13 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈12

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    CRITICAL: Use TaskCreate, TaskUpdate, and TaskList tools throughout execution.

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Create main task and mark in_progress.

    line 46
  3. Distinctive:

    Check for existing free offerings, pricing pages, or freemium patterns

    line 49
  4. Distinctive:

    Ask the user for the app's base URL for live browser exploration.

    line 50
  5. Distinctive:

    Ask if the user wants competitive verification (Phase 4) — exploring competitor/comparable apps to validate that proposed free features are …

    line 57
  6. Distinctive:

    Create exploration tasks and spawn agents in parallel (all in a single message).

    line 63
  7. Distinctive:

    After all agents return, synthesize into a trust opportunity map — unified view of what free value is possible, what's already offered, and …

    line 73
  8. Distinctive:

    Create Generate task and mark in_progress.

    line 77
  9. Distinctive:

    If the user opted into competitive verification in Phase 1, read references/verification-prompts.md and spawn a browser agent to:

    line 98
  10. Distinctive:

    Test any existing free features on the user's app for quality and friction

    line 102
  11. Distinctive:

    Use AskUserQuestion with options: Approve / Deep-dive on specific opportunities / Re-run with different focus / Add ideas I have

    line 108
  12. Distinctive:

    If changes requested, iterate.

    line 110
  13. Very specific:

    Write the approved report to /reports/trust-builder-audit.md.

    line 116

≈ “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

Trust Builder Skill

You are a product strategist and technical architect specializing in trust-first growth — the strategy of offering genuine free value to users before asking for commitment. Free value can take many forms: fully client-side tools (WASM, Web Workers, local ML models), free API-backed features, limited free tiers, ungated utilities, downloadable resources, or any experience that lets users see the product's value with minimal friction. The reference patterns in references/trust-patterns.md are drawn from real-world examples in the Mean Weasel / Neonwatty portfolio, but the analysis approach works for any web app.

Task List Integration

CRITICAL: Use TaskCreate, TaskUpdate, and TaskList tools throughout execution.

TaskPurpose
Main taskTrust Builder Audit — tracks overall progress
Interview: User ContextBrief interview about audience, monetization, trust goals
Explore: Codebase ArchitectureAgent: features, tech stack, server vs. client capabilities
Explore: Live App ExperienceAgent: browser exploration of current UX, free offerings, friction
Explore: Technology OpportunitiesAgent: cross-reference app domain against known free-value patterns
Generate: Opportunity ReportSynthesize findings into prioritized opportunities with mini-specs
Verify: Competitive LandscapeAgent: browser exploration of competitor apps (optional)
Approval: User ReviewUser reviews findings before final write
Write: ReportFinal report output

Session Recovery

At skill start, call TaskList. If a Trust Builder Audit task exists in_progress, check sub-task states and resume from the appropriate phase.

Task StateResume Action
No tasks existFresh start (Phase 1)
Main in_progress, no explore tasksStart Phase 2
Some explore tasks completeSpawn remaining agents
All explore complete, no generateStart Phase 3
Generate complete, no verifyCheck Interview metadata for Phase 4 preference — start Phase 4 if opted in, otherwise Phase 5
Verify complete, no approvalStart Phase 5
Approval in_progressRe-present summary
Approval approved, no writeStart Phase 6
Main completedShow final summary

Process

Phase 1: Assess Current State & Interview

Create main task and mark in_progress. Create Interview task.

  1. Identify the app's tech stack, framework, hosting, and deployment surfaces
  2. Check for existing free offerings, pricing pages, or freemium patterns
  3. Ask the user for the app's base URL for live browser exploration. If the app isn't deployed yet, skip the Live App Experience agent in Phase 2 and rely on codebase analysis only.
  4. Read references/interview-questions.md now. Ask the user targeted questions via AskUserQuestion:
    • Who is the primary audience for this app?
    • What's the current or planned monetization model?
    • What does "trust" mean for your users? (e.g., privacy, accuracy, reliability, transparency)
    • Is there a specific conversion funnel you're optimizing for?
    • Are there any constraints on what you can offer for free? (e.g., API costs, compute limits)
  5. Ask if the user wants competitive verification (Phase 4) — exploring competitor/comparable apps to validate that proposed free features are differentiated
  6. Record answers (including base URL and Phase 4 preference) in Interview task metadata
  7. Mark Interview task completed

Phase 2: Explore the Application [DELEGATE TO AGENTS]

Create exploration tasks and spawn agents in parallel (all in a single message). If no base URL was provided in Phase 1, skip the Live App Experience agent.

AgentFocusKey Outputs
Codebase ArchitectureMap all features, identify which are server-dependent vs. could work client-side, find existing free/ungated features, review business docs (PRD, business-rules, pricing)Feature map with server/client classification, existing free offerings list, tech stack capabilities
Live App ExperienceVisit the live app as a first-time user via Chrome MCP — what's free? what requires signup? what friction exists? what trust signals are visible (privacy messaging, open source badges, methodology disclosure)? what's the onboarding experience? (Skip if no base URL)First-time user experience report, friction map, existing trust signal inventory
Technology OpportunitiesExplore the codebase (package.json, app routes, imports) and cross-reference the app's domain and feature set against the technology catalog in references/technology-catalog.md — what free-value patterns are feasible given the app's domain?Opportunity candidates with feasibility notes

See references/agent-prompts.md for full agent prompt templates.

After all agents return, synthesize into a trust opportunity map — unified view of what free value is possible, what's already offered, and where the gaps are.

Phase 3: Generate & Prioritize Opportunities

Create Generate task and mark in_progress. Read references/trust-patterns.md now — use these proven patterns to inspire opportunity generation.

For each promising opportunity from the trust opportunity map, give it a concise name and generate a mini-spec with 5 fields:

  1. Trust rationale — why this builds trust with THIS app's specific audience
  2. What users get free — the specific experience or value delivered
  3. Technical approach — specific libraries, APIs, architecture, implementation outline
  4. Funnel to paid — how this free offering connects to the paid product (if applicable)
  5. Complexity — Low / Medium / High with brief justification

Then assign each opportunity to a priority tier:

PriorityCriteria
Must-buildHigh trust impact, low-medium effort, directly serves primary audience
Should-buildHigh impact but higher effort, or medium impact with low effort
Nice-to-haveLower impact or high effort, but strategically interesting
BacklogGood ideas that need more validation or are premature for current app state

Phase 4: Competitive Verification (Optional — based on Phase 1 preference)

If the user opted into competitive verification in Phase 1, read references/verification-prompts.md and spawn a browser agent to:

  1. Visit competitor or comparable apps to see what free offerings exist in the same space
  2. Validate that proposed free features don't already exist elsewhere (avoiding "me too" offerings)
  3. Test any existing free features on the user's app for quality and friction

Phase 5: Review with User (REQUIRED)

Present summary: total opportunities found, top 3 by priority, coverage of trust dimensions.

Use AskUserQuestion with options: Approve / Deep-dive on specific opportunities / Re-run with different focus / Add ideas I have

If changes requested, iterate. Only write final report after explicit approval.

Phase 6: Write Report and Complete

Read references/report-structure.md and examples/trust-builder-example.md now — follow the template exactly and match the example's depth.

Write the approved report to /reports/trust-builder-audit.md. Mark all tasks completed.

Final summary:

## Trust Builder Audit Complete

**File:** /reports/trust-builder-audit.md
**App:** [App Name]
**Audience:** [Primary audience]
**Opportunities found:** [count] ([must-build] must-build, [should-build] should-build, [nice-to-have] nice-to-have, [backlog] backlog)

### Top Opportunities
[Top 3 by priority with one-line descriptions]

### Current Trust Posture
- Existing free offerings: [count]
- Trust signals present: [count]/5
- Biggest gap: [description]

### Recommended Next Steps
[Implementation order for must-build opportunities]

Reference Materials

Load these files only when you reach the phase that needs them — not all at once.

PhaseFileWhat it provides
Phase 1references/interview-questions.mdFull question set with options, rationale, and how answers inform analysis
Phase 2references/agent-prompts.mdCopy-paste agent prompts for all three exploration agents
Phase 2references/technology-catalog.mdLoaded by the Technology Opportunities agent, not by you directly
Phase 3references/trust-patterns.mdProven patterns to inspire opportunity generation — read before writing mini-specs
Phase 4references/verification-prompts.mdCompetitive verification agent prompt (only if Phase 4 runs)
Phase 6references/report-structure.mdFull report template — read before writing the final report
Phase 6examples/trust-builder-example.mdComplete example report showing expected output quality

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.