analytics-instrumentation-planner
Skill3 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Design product analytics instrumentation: event taxonomy, properties schema, funnel definitions, and dashboard specs for AI-powered products. Use when defining metrics, tracking plans, growth experiments, or product analytics setup.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- imohammadfaraz/claude-skills-for-product-managertheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- imohammadfaraz/claude-skills-for-product-manager★ 19same name
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 repository59 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-memory-designerSkill
- ai-cost-optimizerSkill
- ai-evaluation-builderSkill
- ai-latency-optimizerSkill
- ai-solution-architectSkill
- ai-workflow-builderSkill
- context-engineeringSkill
- human-in-the-loop-designerSkill
- multi-agent-plannerSkill
- prompt-engineerSkill
- prompt-optimizerSkill
- prompt-reviewerSkill
- adr-generatorSkill
- api-designerSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- component-diagram-builderSkill
- container-diagram-builderSkill
- data-flow-analyzerSkill
- integration-plannerSkill
- observability-plannerSkill
- scalability-advisorSkill
- solution-architectureSkill
- system-context-builderSkill
- experiment-designerSkill
- go-to-market-plannerSkill
- pricing-strategy-advisorSkill
- mcp-best-practicesSkill
- mcp-client-generatorSkill
- mcp-security-reviewSkill
- mcp-server-generatorSkill
- mcp-tool-generatorSkill
- acceptance-criteria-generatorSkill
- competitive-analysisSkill
- epic-generatorSkill
- feature-prioritizationSkill
- idea-validatorSkill
- north-star-metric-advisorSkill
- okr-builderSkill
- persona-generatorSkill
- prd-generatorSkill
- problem-statement-builderSkill
- product-discovery-assistantSkill
- product-vision-builderSkill
- sprint-plannerSkill
- story-mappingSkill
- user-story-generatorSkill
- value-proposition-designerSkill
- chunking-strategy-advisorSkill
- embedding-strategy-advisorSkill
- hybrid-search-advisorSkill
- knowledge-ingestion-plannerSkill
- rag-architecture-designerSkill
- retriever-optimizerSkill
- ai-governance-advisorSkill
- ai-threat-modelingSkill
- guardrails-builderSkill
- owasp-llm-reviewerSkill
- prompt-injection-detectorSkill
- skill-nameSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 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.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 33
If north-star undefined, run north-star-metric-advisor first or propose candidates.
- Distinctive: line 49
Document drop-off questions each funnel step should answer.
- Distinctive: line 64
No PII in event names or property keys
- Very specific: line 146
Use Segment/Amplitude/Mixpanel taxonomy import where supported.
- Distinctive: line 149
Run tracking plan review before each major release.
≈ “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.
Files
Analytics Instrumentation Planner
Purpose
Design product analytics instrumentation: what to track, how events are named, which properties to capture, and how metrics connect to product goals.
Input: Product flows, north-star metric (optional), key hypotheses, platform constraints (web/mobile/API)
Output: Analytics Tracking Plan with event catalog, property schemas, funnels, and dashboard wireframes
Examples: See examples.md for worked input/output.
Workflow
Step 1: Align metrics to goals
| Layer | Examples | Owner |
| North star | Weekly active teams, successful AI tasks | Product |
| Input metrics | Activation rate, time-to-value | Growth |
| Feature metrics | Prompt success rate, RAG answer helpfulness | Feature teams |
| Guardrail | Error rate, cost per user, churn | Platform |
If north-star undefined, run north-star-metric-advisor first or propose candidates.
Step 2: Map user journeys to funnels
For each critical journey:
Entry → Key actions → Success state → Retention signalExample (AI assistant):
Sign up → First prompt → Successful response → Return within 7dDocument drop-off questions each funnel step should answer.
Step 3: Design event taxonomy
Naming convention: object_action in snake_case (e.g., prompt_submitted, rag_query_completed).
| Event | Trigger | Required properties |
user_signed_up | Account created | source, plan |
prompt_submitted | User sends prompt | model, token_count_bucket |
ai_response_rated | Thumbs up/down | rating, latency_ms |
Rules:
- One event per user-visible action (not per API call unless debugging)
- No PII in event names or property keys
- Hash or bucket sensitive values
Step 4: Define property schema
Global context on every event:
| Property | Type | Example |
user_id | string | internal ID only |
session_id | string | UUID |
app_version | string | 2.4.1 |
environment | enum | prod/staging |
Per-event properties documented with type, allowed values, and nullability.
Step 5: AI-specific instrumentation
| Signal | Event / property | Why |
| Model routing | model_id, route_reason | Cost/quality analysis |
| RAG retrieval | chunks_retrieved, score_max | Debug bad answers |
| Tool calls | tool_name, success | Agent reliability |
| Latency | ttft_ms, total_ms | SLA monitoring |
| Feedback | rating, category | Quality loop |
Align with ai-evaluation-builder online metrics where possible.
Step 6: Dashboard and experiment specs
| Dashboard | Charts | Audience |
| Activation | Funnel, TTV distribution | Product |
| AI quality | Rating trend, override rate | AI team |
| Unit economics | Cost per active user | Leadership |
For A/B tests: primary metric, guardrails, minimum detectable effect, runtime estimate.
Step 7: Validate
Run Validation checklist.
Decision Rules
| Condition | Action |
| No consent for tracking (GDPR) | Stop; define consent-gated events only |
| High-cardinality properties (raw prompts) | Never log; use hashed buckets or opt-in debug |
| Pre-launch product | Track minimum viable set (≤15 events) |
| B2B multi-tenant | Add workspace_id to all events |
| AI cost visibility needed | Require model_id + token_count on inference events |
Validation
- North star and input metrics linked to events
- ≥1 funnel with steps and success definition
- Event catalog ≥10 events with naming convention doc
- Global context properties defined
- No PII in event/property design
- AI-specific signals included for AI products
- Dashboard wireframe with ≥3 charts
- Implementation notes (SDK, server-side vs client)
Anti-patterns
- Track everything — unusable warehouse, privacy risk.
- Vague events —
button_clickedwithout object context. - Metric without owner — dashboard nobody reads.
- Client-only revenue events — trust server-side for billing.
- Prompt logging by default — compliance incident waiting to happen.
Best Practices
- Version the tracking plan in repo (
analytics/tracking-plan.md). - Use Segment/Amplitude/Mixpanel taxonomy import where supported.
- Pair events with
acceptance-criteria-generatorfor measurable stories. - Review event volume and cost quarterly.
- Run tracking plan review before each major release.
Output Structure
# Analytics Tracking Plan: [Product]
## Goals
| Metric | Definition | Target |
|--------|------------|--------|
## Funnels
### [Journey name]
[Steps + questions]
## Event Catalog
| Event | Trigger | Properties |
|-------|---------|------------|
## Global Properties
[Schema table]
## AI Events
[If applicable]
## Dashboards
[Wireframe descriptions]
## Privacy & Consent
[Rules]
## Implementation Checklist
[ ] SDK init [ ] Server events [ ] QA validationNext Skills
| Outcome | Recommended Skill |
| Define north star | product/north-star-metric-advisor |
| Design experiments | product/okr-builder |
| AI quality metrics | ai/ai-evaluation-builder |
| Observability for engineers | architecture/observability-planner |
| PRD success metrics section | product/prd-generator |
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.

